From mlatorra at gmail.com Mon Aug 1 13:22:27 2016 From: mlatorra at gmail.com (Michael LaTorra) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 09:22:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Political Correctness is like the fable of "The Emperor's New Clothes" in reverse. In the fable, the con artists told the emperor and royal court that only the best, most refined people could actually see the non-existent clothes. The advocates of Political Correctness tell everyone that only racist, sexist, xenophobic, stupid, evil people could not see the validity of PC. The PC advocates claim that PC "is just being polite" and so on. Disagreeing with them can be bad for your reputation and career. Surveys of American universities show that faculties have moved much farther to the Left over the past 20+ years. And most faculty don't believe there is anything wrong with that, because only stupid, evil people could disagree with what most faculty believe. Right? This trend is most pronounced in humanities departments. (As a retired professor of English, I can attest to that.) Psychologist Jonathan Haidt (author of "The Righteous Mind") has banded together with other academics who believe that viewpoint diversity is at least as important as the racial and sexual diversity that PC social justice warriors focus on. Haidt et al have created the Heterodox Academy organization. Check out their website for many interesting articles. Heterodoxacademy.org On Jul 31, 2016 9:38 AM, "Giulio Prisco" wrote: > The liberal "intellectual elites" should listen to this warning, and > try to revers ethe trend. > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 3:31 PM, BillK wrote: > > At the risk of starting up the Trump / Brexit arguments again, this > > article from a financial blog seems to risk saying what the PC media > > avoid. > > Note that this is from a professional investor who has to forecast > > fairly well in order to make money. > > > > > > > > Why A Politically Correct West Ensures A Trump Victory > > In Global Trends by Chris MacIntosh July 29, 2016 > > > > Quotes: > > > > What we?re dealing with today is a crisis in political correctness. > > > > But the man on the street is no longer buying it. He?s not that > > stupid. He understands and sees with his own eyes, even if his rulers > > try to distract him. > > > > This is one reason that Brexit is taking place. A populace, > > increasingly distrustful of the establishment and horrified by the > > consequences of the actions already taken by the ruling class, look > > around them in search of someone who will say out loud what they > > whisper to each other behind closed doors. > > > > Brexit was a huge plus for Donald Trump. It provided legitimacy to the > > rhetoric of Trump?s campaign: ?Don?t vote for the establishment > > (Hillary), vote for me.? ?Let?s make America great again? speaks the > > same language that Nigel Farage was speaking. Importantly, Trump > > doesn?t pander to politically correct anything. > > ------------- > > > > Like him or loath him, Nigel Farage provided an increasingly horrified > > citizenry with a crystal clear message which never tried to pander to > > political correctness. A populace under attack (because Europe is most > > certainly under attack) found a level of honesty in the Brexit > > campaign, which was sorely lacking with the ?remain campaign? and they > > voted for it. > > > > When only right-wing demagogues are prepared to say what a politically > > correct establishment is unwilling to say, then it will be right-wing > > demagogues that are elected to power. > > > > Expect this trend to accelerate ? first bringing Trump to power in the > > US and followed by massive changes in Europe, something I?ll cover > > next week, including what I think is the easiest short in history and > > how it is likely to play out. > > ------------ > > > > > > BillK > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Mon Aug 1 13:35:15 2016 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 15:35:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Mike for mentioning heterodoxacademy.org - I subscribed to their Facebook and Twitter feeds and will follow their posts. I totally agree with what you say. On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Michael LaTorra wrote: > Political Correctness is like the fable of "The Emperor's New Clothes" in > reverse. In the fable, the con artists told the emperor and royal court that > only the best, most refined people could actually see the non-existent > clothes. The advocates of Political Correctness tell everyone that only > racist, sexist, xenophobic, stupid, evil people could not see the validity > of PC. The PC advocates claim that PC "is just being polite" and so on. > Disagreeing with them can be bad for your reputation and career. > > Surveys of American universities show that faculties have moved much farther > to the Left over the past 20+ years. And most faculty don't believe there is > anything wrong with that, because only stupid, evil people could disagree > with what most faculty believe. Right? This trend is most pronounced in > humanities departments. (As a retired professor of English, I can attest to > that.) > > Psychologist Jonathan Haidt (author of "The Righteous Mind") has banded > together with other academics who believe that viewpoint diversity is at > least as important as the racial and sexual diversity that PC social justice > warriors focus on. Haidt et al have created the Heterodox Academy > organization. Check out their website for many interesting articles. > > Heterodoxacademy.org > > > On Jul 31, 2016 9:38 AM, "Giulio Prisco" wrote: >> >> The liberal "intellectual elites" should listen to this warning, and >> try to revers ethe trend. >> >> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 3:31 PM, BillK wrote: >> > At the risk of starting up the Trump / Brexit arguments again, this >> > article from a financial blog seems to risk saying what the PC media >> > avoid. >> > Note that this is from a professional investor who has to forecast >> > fairly well in order to make money. >> > >> > >> > >> > Why A Politically Correct West Ensures A Trump Victory >> > In Global Trends by Chris MacIntosh July 29, 2016 >> > >> > Quotes: >> > >> > What we?re dealing with today is a crisis in political correctness. >> > >> > But the man on the street is no longer buying it. He?s not that >> > stupid. He understands and sees with his own eyes, even if his rulers >> > try to distract him. >> > >> > This is one reason that Brexit is taking place. A populace, >> > increasingly distrustful of the establishment and horrified by the >> > consequences of the actions already taken by the ruling class, look >> > around them in search of someone who will say out loud what they >> > whisper to each other behind closed doors. >> > >> > Brexit was a huge plus for Donald Trump. It provided legitimacy to the >> > rhetoric of Trump?s campaign: ?Don?t vote for the establishment >> > (Hillary), vote for me.? ?Let?s make America great again? speaks the >> > same language that Nigel Farage was speaking. Importantly, Trump >> > doesn?t pander to politically correct anything. >> > ------------- >> > >> > Like him or loath him, Nigel Farage provided an increasingly horrified >> > citizenry with a crystal clear message which never tried to pander to >> > political correctness. A populace under attack (because Europe is most >> > certainly under attack) found a level of honesty in the Brexit >> > campaign, which was sorely lacking with the ?remain campaign? and they >> > voted for it. >> > >> > When only right-wing demagogues are prepared to say what a politically >> > correct establishment is unwilling to say, then it will be right-wing >> > demagogues that are elected to power. >> > >> > Expect this trend to accelerate ? first bringing Trump to power in the >> > US and followed by massive changes in Europe, something I?ll cover >> > next week, including what I think is the easiest short in history and >> > how it is likely to play out. >> > ------------ >> > >> > >> > BillK >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > extropy-chat mailing list >> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 2 08:43:24 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 09:43:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The basic intellectual problem with political correctness (in a generalized sense) is this: 1. We strive to uphold some noble value (equality, patriotism, purity of math...) X 2. We use argument A (among others) to argue for the value. 3. You point out argument A is invalid. 4. Hence you must be against X, and you are a *bad* person! Sure, there is more sociology and psychology to it than that, but I think this is what makes political correctness truly problematic in academia. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 2 20:26:41 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:26:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:43 AM, Anders wrote: > The basic intellectual problem with political correctness (in a > generalized sense) is this: > > 1. We strive to uphold some noble value (equality, patriotism, purity of > math...) X > 2. We use argument A (among others) to argue for the value. > 3. You point out argument A is invalid. > 4. Hence you must be against X, and you are a *bad* person! > > Sure, there is more sociology and psychology to it than that, but I think > this is what makes political correctness truly problematic in academia. > > ?I'd like to add a bit or two. PC people tend towards the extremes of > whatever position they hold. They also tend to be very high on the > Purity/Disgust dimension (Haidt). When something comes along that is > different from what they hold they are suspicious, sometimes to the point > of paranoia.? A little of the 'bad stuff' (other positions, something > undercutting their position, like Anders' example of an invalid argument) > is disgusting prima facie and thus violating their purity stance. > > -- > ?This is black and white thinking at its worst. Notice at 1. above in Anders' list is assumed to be true and inarguable?. I'd say this is far worse than 'problematic'. From my perspective it's a form of religious thinking. You are challenging their God or their Bible and automatically wrong - and a bad person! These people have infected the Republican Party and its offshoots, like the Tea Party. At first they look very good, very dedicated, full of the right ideas. Then you find that they are inflexible and nearly rabid in their beliefs. A bit like the Martyr Complex, eh? ?Impossible to deal with or change in any way. The slightest compromise is disgusting. Definition (of personality disorder)By Mayo Clinic Staff A personality disorder is a type of mental disorder in which you have a rigid and unhealthy pattern of thinking, functioning and behaving. A person with a personality disorder has trouble perceiving and relating to situations and to people. This causes significant problems and limitations in relationships, social encounters, work and school. In some cases, you may not realize that you have a personality disorder because your way of thinking and behaving seems natural to you. And you may blame others for the challenges you face. We tend to think of psychosis and neurosis as the mental disorders but these in certain ways are just as bad. This is the category in which the psychopath falls (the PC personality could not be further from the psychopath but both have personality disorders) bill w? > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 2 20:04:45 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 21:04:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Kurzgesagt Message-ID: <7bcb6252-2416-873b-b0c8-7e82217c6aed@aleph.se> Today I found this delightful animation about the Fermi Paradox. Relevant not just because the discussion of list member Robin's Great Filter, but also a pretty inspiring ending: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc (the previous version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fQkVqno-uI has a few other familiar concepts.) I found it via the recent animation about gamma ray bursts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLykC1VN7NY Very fun. They also have one about space elevators: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPQQwqGWktE They are not always correct - this one is far too pessimistic, as per my "Eternity in Six Hours" paper (and an upcoming paper on how to colonize *fast* - stay tuned!). The basics are right, but we can go a few billion lightyears more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL4yYHdDSWs https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt/videos?sort=dd&shelf_id=18&view=0 -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 02:36:27 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 19:36:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Kurzgesagt In-Reply-To: <7bcb6252-2416-873b-b0c8-7e82217c6aed@aleph.se> References: <7bcb6252-2416-873b-b0c8-7e82217c6aed@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Anders wrote: > https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt/videos?sort=dd&shelf_id=18&view= > > Ironically, YouTube randomly recommended the series to me this morning as well. I wonder if it recently got a popularity boost. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 06:44:52 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 02:44:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:26 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > These people have infected the Republican Party and its offshoots, like > the Tea Party. At first they look very good, very dedicated, full of the > right ideas. Then you find that they are inflexible and nearly rabid in > their beliefs. A bit like the Martyr Complex, eh? > > ### It's funny you use, of all things, Christians as the exemplar of political correctness. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 07:01:45 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 03:01:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Anders wrote: > The basic intellectual problem with political correctness (in a > generalized sense) is this: > > 1. We strive to uphold some noble value (equality, patriotism, purity of > math...) X > 2. We use argument A (among others) to argue for the value. > 3. You point out argument A is invalid. > 4. Hence you must be against X, and you are a *bad* person! > > Sure, there is more sociology and psychology to it than that, but I think > this is what makes political correctness truly problematic in academia. ### I would think that the most problematic (oops, the language of the enemy infects my diction) issue of political correctness is the power imbalance it is associated with. Political correctness is another name for the ideological orthodoxy that since about 1970 has been slowly accepted by the power elites in most Western nations, replacing previous national, religious and other orthodoxies. It is a set of claims about the world and a set of norms to guide and judge behavior. Since the factual claims of political correctness are often actually incorrect, and the norms are often odious to most reasonable people, political correctness is potentially harmful. Since it was accepted by power elites worldwide, the harms are in fact widespread and hard to escape from. Lack of ideological diversity among elites, the almost complete takeover of positions of power by politically correct cadres in a number of countries, is therefore a major flaw of the current global political system. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 07:10:20 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 03:10:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Is the list down? In-Reply-To: References: <005901d1e6a5$e1425c70$a3c71550$@att.net> <001a01d1e91b$3ff896e0$bfe9c4a0$@att.net> Message-ID: I just sent $50 On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, John Clark wrote: > I just sent $80 via paypal to max at maxmore.com > > John Clark > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 5:59 PM, spike wrote: > >> >> >> OK cool, well while the list was down, several of the chronics contacted >> me and asked if we could donate to the upkeep and maintenance. John Clark >> pledged his winnings from Mrs. Clinton?s non-indictment, I matched and >> doubled, and several others have suggested they would donate to keeping the >> ExI list alive. Max I don?t see why you are always stuck with the bill for >> this. Many of us have benefitted from its continuing existence. >> >> >> >> I suggested to John in the very slim chance Mrs. Clinton is indicted >> before 6 November, I would donate the ill-gotten gains (200 bucks I think) >> to ExI-chat server maintenance. {8^D If not, I will kick in some clams >> anyway. Max, shall we post it to your Alcor address? What is it? >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Senior Scientist, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 07:10:49 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 03:10:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Case A-2643 In-Reply-To: References: <1c7ee057-7b71-cd21-ca9f-c2221564c853@aleph.se> Message-ID: This is a post I tried to send when ExI was down. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rafal Smigrodzki Date: Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:05 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Case A-2643 To: Cc: ExI chat list On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Dylan Distasio wrote: > I'm a novice on cryonics but why can't a ventricular brain shunt(s) be > used to perfuse the brain directly, avoiding BBB challenges? > ### This might be an interesting idea, although a ventricular drain would be insufficient to perfuse tissue in any reasonable amount of time. You can deliver medications intrathecally and avoid the BBB but the intraventricular space does not branch out in the brain tissue like the vascular system does, so a ventricular perfusion would have to rely on cryoprotectant diffusion over centimeter scales, which would be impractical. A ventricular drain could be used to replace the ventricular fluid with gas though, and this might help reduce the mechanical strains on brain tissue during cooling. I wonder if this was ever considered by Alcor? Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Aug 3 08:18:51 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:18:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> On 2016-08-03 08:01, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Since the factual claims of political correctness are often actually > incorrect, and the norms are often odious to most reasonable people, > political correctness is potentially harmful. Since it was accepted by > power elites worldwide, the harms are in fact widespread and hard to > escape from. Note that this has nearly always been the case: when an ideological orthodoxy becomes entrenched, it seldom becomes entrenched because it is true but because of other appeals or practical reasons. The harmful intellectual effects are the same. (Ob ref: Hayek, "The Intellectuals and Socialism") > Lack of ideological diversity among elites, the almost complete > takeover of positions of power by politically correct cadres in a > number of countries, is therefore a major flaw of the current global > political system. What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Aug 3 08:19:34 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:19:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Kurzgesagt In-Reply-To: References: <7bcb6252-2416-873b-b0c8-7e82217c6aed@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 2016-08-03 03:36, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Anders > wrote: > > https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt/videos?sort=dd&shelf_id=18&view= > > > > Ironically, YouTube randomly recommended the series to me this morning > as well. I wonder if it recently got a popularity boost. Boing Boing had a post recommending the GRB episode; that was how I found it. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 15:51:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:51:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= Message-ID: I know that many on this list are tired of posts about Donald Trump but I'm going to write one anyway because something came up today that confirms my belief that this erratic unstable individual is the greatest immediate existential threat to the world today. Joe ? ? Scarborough ? ? interviewed former 4 star general and head of both the NSA and the CIA ? ? Michael Hayden, in the course of it ? ? Scarborough ? ? said: " ? ? *Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can't we use them?. ?Three times in an hour briefing, ?Why can?t we use nuclear? ?weapons* *?*' "? ? Hayden ? ? was then asked how long it would be between a presidential decision to attack and the nuclear missiles actually getting into the air. Hayden said it depended on circumstances and he wouldn't get into classified stuff, but he did say: "The system is designed for speed and decisiveness, it is not designed to debate the decision". http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/08/trump-asked-advisor-why-cant-we-use-nuclear-weapons.html John K Clark ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 16:17:41 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 12:17:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jesus fuckin shit. Not that I'm surprised because this is what I've been telling people. However, what surprises me is the idea that anybody on this list can read repeatedly about Trump's cavalier and na?ve attitude regarding the proliferation and use of nuclear weapons, and continue to equate potential Trump presidency with a potential Clinton presidency in terms of existential danger. It blows my mind that anyone who claims to be intelligent and especially anyone who supports H+ and the ascendancy of the wisdom and technological prowess of the human species would do anything but vote for Clinton. I understand the value of a third-party protest vote or of abstaining, but this isn't the time for that. Really I do highly respect the knowledge of everyone here but if you aren't doing everything this election to keep Trump out of office then you might want to trade in your Mensa card for a dunce cap. Or maybe for a bomb shelter and some iodine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dsunley at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 16:31:46 2016 From: dsunley at gmail.com (Darin Sunley) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 10:31:46 -0600 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in and of itself. We've heard that story before. On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Jesus fuckin shit. Not that I'm surprised because this is what I've been > telling people. However, what surprises me is the idea that anybody on this > list can read repeatedly about Trump's cavalier and na?ve attitude > regarding the proliferation and use of nuclear weapons, and continue to > equate potential Trump presidency with a potential Clinton presidency in > terms of existential danger. It blows my mind that anyone who claims to be > intelligent and especially anyone who supports H+ and the ascendancy of the > wisdom and technological prowess of the human species would do anything but > vote for Clinton. I understand the value of a third-party protest vote or > of abstaining, but this isn't the time for that. > > Really I do highly respect the knowledge of everyone here but if you > aren't doing everything this election to keep Trump out of office then you > might want to trade in your Mensa card for a dunce cap. Or maybe for a > bomb shelter and some iodine. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 17:04:52 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 18:04:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 3 August 2016 at 16:51, John Clark wrote: > Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went > to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about the use of > nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can't > we use them > . > Three times in an hour briefing, ?Why can?t we use nuclear weapons" No need to panic about today's rumour about something Trump might or might not have said in an off-the-record chat with an unnamed 'advisor'. The Trump campaign has denied it of course. Every day a rumour, every day a denial or rephrasing. It is worth remembering that no Western political leader has ever said that they would never use nuclear weapons. Because if they did, and set about dismantling them, there would be no deterrent to stop enemy countries using them. BillK From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 18:00:30 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:00:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Darin Sunley wrote: > If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be > able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump > could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have > spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill > Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. > > "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in > and of itself. We've heard that story before. > ### But this kind of rhetoric plays into people's confirmation bias greatly. Sensational stories about the evil of the other guy may not find traction with the other guy's followers, but they sure make your own sheep scared of leaving. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 18:30:11 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:30:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:04 PM, BillK wrote: ?> ? > No need to panic If you are keeping your head while others around you are losing theirs ?then you just don't understand the situation. ? I f you wanted to brush up on your knowledge of international relations and were given a one hour tutorial on the subject by a world class expert would your first question be, why don't people use nuclear weapons more often, why are they so bad? Would you really be so confused about this that you had to ask 3 times? I don't think so because you're sane and to sane people the answer to some questions are just obvious, but it wasn't obvious to Donald Trump. > ? > ?> ? > It is worth remembering that no Western political leader has ever said > ? ? > that they would never use nuclear weapons. To my knowledge since the end of the Cold War until Trump no Western political leader has publicly said using nuclear weapons in Europe was not off the table because Europe is a big place. And is worth ? ? remembering that ? ? until Donald Trump crawled out of his hole ? ? no Western ? ? or Eastern ? ? political leader ? ? has EVER encouraged another nation to obtain nuclear weapons, the USA even tried to discourage Briton from doing so, but Donald Fucking Trump and wants to encourage Germany, South Korea, Japan, ? ? Taiwan and ? ? Saudi Arabia ? ? to develop nuclear weapons. ? ? SAUDI ARABIA for god's sake! And by the way, Michael Hayden ?, the ? 4 star general and head of both the NSA and the CIA ? that I was talking about, also said that ?when President Trump orders the army to kill the children of suspected terrorists and to torture people in ways that were "a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding" ? the military will refuse to commit war crimes and will flat out refuse to obey their commander in chief. If Donald Trump is elected, even if nuclear war is avoided, I don't think he will serve out his entire 4 year term, he will either resign, be impeached, or be overthrown in a military coup ?. And I'll be on the side of the coup. Historically democracies only last for a few hundred years, If Trump wins our time is up. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 18:52:55 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:52:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0ABA8D78-138E-4DD8-A4EF-52437F4D70B6@gmail.com> On Aug 3, 2016, at 9:31 AM, Darin Sunley wrote: > If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. > > "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in and of itself. We've heard that story before. Exactly! Here in the States, every election gets depicted as the final battle between Good and Evil -- conveniently narrowed down to Democrat vs. Republican -- and somehow, magically, everyone's single vote makes all the difference. Notably, this is the only time people tend to believe an individual choice matters. I find it sad that some (maybe many) folks here is taken in by the spectacle. The sadder thing really is not whether one really bad person or another will be president, but that this divides people. Well, that and also that anyone should be president. The office should be abolished, the White House turned into a homeless shelter, and every last person who has served as president should be roughly if not brutally thrown out of polite society. Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 18:57:08 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:57:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Kurzgesagt In-Reply-To: References: <7bcb6252-2416-873b-b0c8-7e82217c6aed@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Aug 3, 2016 1:54 AM, "Anders" wrote: > Boing Boing had a post recommending the GRB episode; that was how I found it. That would explain it. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ColbertBump and then YouTube recommends what's popular. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 19:40:00 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 15:40:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: <0ABA8D78-138E-4DD8-A4EF-52437F4D70B6@gmail.com> References: <0ABA8D78-138E-4DD8-A4EF-52437F4D70B6@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > ?> ? > The office should be abolished, the White House turned into a homeless > shelter, and every last person who has served as president should be > roughly if not brutally thrown out of polite society. > ?Maybe that's what should happen, but that most certainly is not what's going to happen. What's going to happen is that in 3 months the decision will be made on which one of 2 people is going to be handed the keys to a Trident Nuclear Submarine. And one of them is a madman. And what's going to happen is that even after armageddon some people (if people haven't gone completely extinct) will still say a insecure Email server was more important.? ? John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 19:47:13 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 15:47:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Darin Sunley wrote: ?> ? > If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be > able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump > could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have > spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill > Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. > ?There is no point in pretending that Trump is just another presidential candidate, he isn't. George W Bush was as dumb as a sack of rocks and the worst president in my lifetime but he was sane, I don't think Trump is. If we have another Cuban Missile Crisis, if President Trump has to decide between being personally embarrassed and causing the extinction of the human race I don't think he will even hesitate, he will reach for his Red Telephone. ? ?> ? > "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in > and of itself. We've heard that story before. > ?No, you haven't heard that before. No sitting American president from ?either political party has ever said that one of the 2 people that will succeed him is simply unfit for office, but Obama did yesterday: *?"Donald Trump ?is unfit and woefully unprepared to be president?. ?There have been Republican presidents with whom I disagreed but I didn?t have a doubt that they could function as president?.? I think I was right and Mitt Romney and John McCain were wrong on certain policy issues but I never thought that they couldn?t do the job. And had they won, I would have been disappointed but I would have said to all Americans: this is our president and I know they?re going to abide by certain norms and rules and common sense, will observe basic decency, will have enough knowledge about economic policy and foreign policy and our constitutional traditions and rule of law that our government will work and then we?ll compete four years from now to try and win an election.? ?But that?s not the situation here.?"? * ?That is unprecedented, that is not politics as usual, that has not been said in 200 years. And it's hard to keep up with Trump, just today he said if he loses that can only mean the election was rigged and the November 8 vote illegal, and that also is not politics as usual, no presidential candidate has ever said something like that before. John K Clark ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 22:12:00 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 17:12:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> References: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> Message-ID: What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University I really hope someone will answer this. If 'elites' mean those in power, then I'd guess none and no place unless you count multiple political parties. Too much suppression of dissent in history. bill w On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-08-03 08:01, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > Since the factual claims of political correctness are often actually > incorrect, and the norms are often odious to most reasonable people, > political correctness is potentially harmful. Since it was accepted by > power elites worldwide, the harms are in fact widespread and hard to escape > from. > > > Note that this has nearly always been the case: when an ideological > orthodoxy becomes entrenched, it seldom becomes entrenched because it is > true but because of other appeals or practical reasons. The harmful > intellectual effects are the same. (Ob ref: Hayek, "The Intellectuals and > Socialism") > > Lack of ideological diversity among elites, the almost complete takeover > of positions of power by politically correct cadres in a number of > countries, is therefore a major flaw of the current global political system. > > > What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 22:31:41 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 15:31:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> Message-ID: <6399605F-947C-4290-B590-CEDD2E63E3EF@gmail.com> On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:12 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > I really hope someone will answer this. If 'elites' mean those in power, then I'd guess none and no place unless you count multiple political parties. Too much suppression of dissent in history. I think periods of elite fragmentation might show high ideological diversity amongst elites. However, elite fragmentation need not be synonymous with ideological diversity. After all, each faction might agree on many fundamentals and just disagree on who should be in charge. (Stephen Walt's _The Origins of Alliances_ seems to show low ideological diversity might actually result in more conflict -- at least amongst nations rather than within a national elite.) Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dan_ust at yahoo.com Wed Aug 3 22:22:35 2016 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan Ust) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 15:22:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Stanis=C5=82aw_Lem_was_there=2C_and_there=3F?= References: Message-ID: <74C8A708-6F32-4EB5-BBF8-42DD5BF386D0@yahoo.com> > From: Birger Johansson > Date: August 3, 2016 at 2:07:46 PM PDT > To: S-Lem listan > Subject: Stanis?aw Lem was there, and there. > Reply-To: Birger Johansson > > From the letters section at New scientist: Stanis?aw Lem was there, and there. https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg23130850-800-11-stanisaw-lem-was-there-and-there/ I think some of these things can be traced back further still, no? Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 23:14:30 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 19:14:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry in advance for my (sparing) use of the shift key. Sometimes it really seems like you need to yell. Or rather, sometimes you really, really want to: -- All right, "Hillary is as bad as Trump" people, I will even ignore for the duration of this email the fact that not doing everything in one's power to prevent Trump from attaining office is tantamount to condoning nuclear war. HOWEVER: We are on an email list for smart people. Transhumanism is for smart people. You are all proud of being smart. The topics we discuss here--physics, astronomy, neuroscience, anthropology--fill you with true joyous passion. Think back to when you found the first friend or clique who was as intelligent as you. Was it the most amazing moment of your life thus far? I know for me it was. Finally! People I could actually, deeply, honestly talk to, instead of just speak at. That's what this email list is. It's all the joy you ever had at being surrounded by others whose thoughts are as quick, as non-linear, as symbol-rich as your own. I have to ask, then: WHY DO YOU SUPPORT, EXPLICITLY OR IMPLICITLY, AN ENEMY OF INTELLIGENCE? Donald Trump is not just, as Spike might say, a "prole". There are people out there who might think somewhat less quickly and less complexly than people like us, but who appreciate the work of scientists and inventors. People who go to college even though they aren't geniuses, because they understand the value of learning. Donald Trump is not one of those people. Donald Trump is not *like* those people. This is a man who willfully rejects learning and intelligence. A man who one week stated that he thought Russia had a territorial right to Crimea and the next week showed that he DID NOT EVEN KNOW THAT RUSSIA HAD ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY EXERCISED THAT CLAIM. A man who not only constantly demonstrates, as a *candidate for the presidency of the United States of America*, a complete lack of domestic and foreign policy knowledge, but who also, when his total ignorance of some particular geopolitical topic is demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt, very clearly takes NO STEPS towards remedying this ignorance. In short, when Donald Trump sees that he does not know something, the knowledge of which is publicly agreed upon to be of import for an American president, he does not believe that it is important to learn it. There is the adage that the wisest man knows that he knows nothing. I think this needs to be appended. The wisest man knows that he or she knows nothing, and strives to correct that lack of knowledge when it is discovered. It's the absolute CORE AXIOM of wisdom--that when you find out you don't know something that you 'should' know, you understand the implicit need to fill in that knowledge gap. Donald Trump is anti-learning. That is different than being prejudiced against intelligent people, or being a luddite, or disliking "know-it-all-ism". Donald Trump is opposed to LEARNING. And there are smart people on this list who think he can be responsible for the future of the children of America. Tell you what, I have a proposition: Myself, and anyone else on this list who thinks Hillary Clinton would make a better president and is willing to accept the terms of this proposition, will never again on this list make statements that indicate we support the impetus for people to be non-corrupt. And we won't ever criticize corruption either. IN EXCHANGE, anyone on this list who thinks Donald Trump would make a better president will never again on this list make statements that indicate you support the impetus for people to be intelligent, and you may never criticize anti-intellectualism either. Does that sound like an all right agreement? What do you say, Trump people--are you willing to rescind your love of knowledge and learning? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 23:39:29 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 16:39:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Aug 3, 2016 12:48 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Darin Sunley wrote: >> If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. > > ?There is no point in pretending that Trump is just another presidential candidate, he isn't. You miss Darin's point. In previous contests the tone and volume of complaints about the other party were ramped up. Thus, while the complaints about Trump being worse are true, to too many voters the complaints just sound like more of the same. No amount of going on about Trump will fix this problem, because that is not this problem. (Trump is a problem, but not the problem Darin is talking about.) > And it's hard to keep up with Trump, just today he said if he loses that can only mean the election was rigged and the November 8 vote illegal, and that also is not politics as usual, no presidential candidate has ever said something like that before. Unfortunately, for all the lies Trump puts forth, that particular charge is provably correct in too many states. (The rigged part, anyway. Way too many laws are in place making the practices legal, and then there's the question of whether something is effectively legal if the government will never prosecute anyone for it despite what the law says.) It has been a small effect so far; only in Gore vs. Bush has it arguably affected the outcome. Trump supporters will likely imagine a much bigger level than is the truth, whether he loses or merely fails to win by a landslide. It is almost as if "hack the vote" wasn't just a catchphrase. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 3 23:45:13 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 16:45:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Aug 3, 2016 4:16 PM, "Will Steinberg" wrote: > Tell you what, I have a proposition: > > Myself, and anyone else on this list who thinks Hillary Clinton would make a better president and is willing to accept the terms of this proposition, will never again on this list make statements that indicate we support the impetus for people to be non-corrupt. And we won't ever criticize corruption either. > > IN EXCHANGE, anyone on this list who thinks Donald Trump would make a better president will never again on this list make statements that indicate you support the impetus for people to be intelligent, and you may never criticize anti-intellectualism either. Trump supporters will reject your proposition because they reject the facts it is based upon. Many Hillary supporters will reject it for that reason too, but from Hillary's side. I, meanwhile, will do the right thing and vote third party. My vote will not change all of my state's delegates voting Democrat, but it may lessen the resulting perceived mandate, while reducing Trump's vote percent by the same amount. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Aug 3 21:16:48 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 22:16:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <77c12868-5bee-3cc1-d441-0c0b63653693@aleph.se> If nothing else that clip is great TV. That horrified silence is a keeper! Now, to be fair, if I was a foreign policy n00b and got a high level briefing it might actually make sense to ask about nuclear doctrine - it is somewhat recondite, and I would be really curious. But three times? OK, his staff has categorically denied that a briefing took place... which opens the even more disturbing issue that he has not had anybody advice him on relevant matters. In many ways the US system is about selecting a group of people rather than a person. Even a less bright chap might have a good team, and focus on the social part of the job. The thing that looks increasingly problematic here is that it actually seems to be just one person on the Trump side. That is not going to work. On 2016-08-03 16:51, John Clark wrote: > I know that many on this list are tired of posts about Donald Trump > but I'm going to write one anyway because something came up today that > confirms my belief that this erratic unstable individual is the > greatest immediate existential threat to the world today. Joe > ? ? > Scarborough > ? ? > interviewed former 4 star general and head of both the NSA and the CIA > ? ? > Michael Hayden, in the course of it > ? ? > Scarborough > ? ? > said: > > " > ? ? > /Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international > level went to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about > the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we > had them why can't we use them > ?. ? > Three times in an hour briefing, ?Why can?t we use nuclear > ? ? > weapons/ > /?/' "? > ? > > Hayden > ? ? > was then asked how long it would be between a presidential decision to > attack and the nuclear missiles actually getting into the air. Hayden > said it depended on circumstances and he wouldn't get into classified > stuff, but he did say: > > "The system is designed for speed and decisiveness, it is not designed > to debate the decision". > > > http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/08/trump-asked-advisor-why-cant-we-use-nuclear-weapons.html > > John K Clark ? > > > ? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 4 01:23:45 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 18:23:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal Message-ID: I get a trace of signal when on the local peaks. ?Haven't had news since 22 July but will make an educated guess on our sad state of affairs trump hasn't gotten any less crazy and clinton hasn't gotten any less corrupt. ?Johnson and weld. ?Hear the footsteps. ?spike Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 01:43:01 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:43:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > I, meanwhile, will do the right thing and vote third party. My vote will > not change all of my state's delegates voting Democrat, but it may lessen > the resulting perceived mandate, while reducing Trump's vote percent by the > same amount. > Ok, if your state is gonna go blue anyway then a protest vote is rational. BUT if you're looking at things from a categorical imperative kinda perspective, what if too many people think that way and Trump wins there?! I guess that was sort of a joke...scary joke though. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 01:48:17 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:48:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:23 PM, spike wrote: > > I get a trace of signal when on the local peaks. Haven't had news since > 22 July but will make an educated guess on our sad state of affairs trump > hasn't gotten any less crazy and clinton hasn't gotten any less corrupt. > Johnson and weld. Hear the footsteps. spike > Spike, what state do you live in? Or if that's too much information to give, do you live in a state that always, always goes for the Democratic candidate? If not, then I'm sorry but it's EXTREMELY na?ve to not vote for Hillary, especially for you as somebody who cares about intelligence so much that if I had a buck for every time you used the term "proles" on this list, I'd have a lot of bucks. As I said in the other thread, Trump is an anti-learning candidate that any person who values knowledge should be embarrassed to take any action or lack of action that would help him get elected. Also, any person who values not having the Earth turn into a post-apocalyptic nuclear wasteland.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dsunley at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 02:08:34 2016 From: dsunley at gmail.com (Darin Sunley) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 20:08:34 -0600 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm in Utah. This state is gonna go red unless Trump, to quote Edwin Edwards, "gets caught with a dead girl or a live boy." So I'm voting Libertarian. Even taking the categorical imperative into account, it's an open-and-shut case. On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> >> I, meanwhile, will do the right thing and vote third party. My vote will >> not change all of my state's delegates voting Democrat, but it may lessen >> the resulting perceived mandate, while reducing Trump's vote percent by the >> same amount. >> > Ok, if your state is gonna go blue anyway then a protest vote is rational. > > BUT if you're looking at things from a categorical imperative kinda > perspective, what if too many people think that way and Trump wins there?! > > I guess that was sort of a joke...scary joke though. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 02:19:43 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 19:19:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Or if that's too much information to give, do you live in a state that > always, always goes for the Democratic candidate? > > If not, then I'm sorry but it's EXTREMELY na?ve to not vote for Hillary > You have heard that the RNC is trying to get up the gumption to remove Trump from the ticket, voters' wishes be damned, right? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 02:35:29 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 19:35:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > BUT if you're looking at things from a categorical imperative kinda > perspective, > Then you tend to miss a lot of facts, and spend inordinate effort chasing down low probability events. The value to humanity of me yelling and screaming at everyone to vote Clinton is far less than, say, the value to humanity of me taking the same time and effort to develop and promote cheaper space access for the general public, to take a non-hypothetical choice in my case. (Speaking of - by chance, will anyone on this list be at SmallSat next week? Wouldn't mind meeting up.) This remains true even if Trump somehow wins, given as the military leadership has basically already declared a coup, if he wins, the minute he tries ordering war crimes. what if too many people think that way and Trump wins there?! > The odds of Trump carrying California are less than the odds of Johnson carrying California, given how people would switch. Also: October (for those of us who vote by mail) is a couple months away. The RNC might get serious about trying to switch candidates. Johnson might get in the debates. It could come out that Clinton bribed Trump to do as much damage to the Republican Party's chances of beating her as he could and has, in RPG parlance, scored a critical hit. Trump could quit once it's too late to take his name off of most-to-all state ballots, providing more circumstantial evidence of said deal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 02:36:26 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 19:36:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Stanis=C5=82aw_Lem_was_there=2C_and_there=3F?= References: <74C8A708-6F32-4EB5-BBF8-42DD5BF386D0@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <59AD5156-FD15-4FC9-9A0C-10A1F11B1D67@gmail.com> > From: Birger Johansson > Date: August 3, 2016 at 2:07:46 PM PDT > To: S-Lem listan > Subject: Stanis?aw Lem was there, and there. > Reply-To: Birger Johansson > > From the letters section at New scientist: Stanis?aw Lem was there, and there. https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg23130850-800-11-stanisaw-lem-was-there-and-there/ I think some of these things can be traced back further still, no? Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 04:40:58 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 00:40:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > > > If not, then I'm sorry but it's EXTREMELY na?ve to not vote for Hillary, > especially for you as somebody who cares about intelligence so much that if > I had a buck for every time you used the term "proles" on this list, I'd > have a lot of bucks. > ### Let's not discuss the elections. This is more painful than the gun debate. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 04:49:16 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 00:49:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> References: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Anders wrote: > > Lack of ideological diversity among elites, the almost complete takeover > of positions of power by politically correct cadres in a number of > countries, is therefore a major flaw of the current global political system. > > > What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? > ### Perhaps I should have left out the word "current" from my post. Indeed, as you imply, ideological purity tended to become a touchstone of belonging to elites throughout history and today's world is not much different from empires past. The one salient difference might be the homogenising influence of media, both mass and social. Ideology spreads now more easily between countries, increasing the risk of forming a world government at some point. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 05:06:59 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 01:06:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= In-Reply-To: References: <0ABA8D78-138E-4DD8-A4EF-52437F4D70B6@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:40 PM, John Clark wrote: > What's going to happen is that in 3 months the decision will be made on > which one of 2 people is going to be handed the keys to a Trident Nuclear > Submarine. And one of them is a madman. > ### I know Mr Khan. He is a kind person, the death of his son was an ordeal for him and his wife. Ms Khan always inquires how I am doing when we meet. I never met Humayun but I remember when his brother Shaharyar heard of his death. They were close, planned for Humayun to join our company after his tour of duty. Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic terrorists, for short term political gain. Then she pushed to throw away American gains in Iraq, making his sacrifice meaningless, for short term political gain. Now she wants to let in more Islamic terrorists into the US, for short term political gain. It's a strange world, where victims are manipulated to support the cause of their tormentors. Where kind men end up on opposing sides, divided by professional political operatives, for short term political gain. Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 07:52:15 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 08:52:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial Message-ID: It reads like the clich?d plot of a horror novel: by ingesting the blood of a younger person, you become younger yourself. Incredibly, this more or less describes a clinical trial approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For $8,000, you can buy a place in the trial which, over two days, infuses you with 1.5 liters (about 3 pints) of a young person?s blood. Then, blood samples taken before the infusion and one month later will be tested for 100 biomarkers to see if you show any signs of reversing the aging process. Quotes: The FDA has good reason to approve a trial for what seems like a somewhat bonkers idea. A remarkable experiment in 2014 rejuvenated the old idea of parabiosis, or giving young blood to an old person. However, instead of just transfering blood, Tony Wyss-Coray of Stanford University transfused young mice?s plasma?which is the yellowish part of the blood that remains after removing platelets and both red and white blood cells?into their older counterparts. The tests showed that the older mice subsequently had better brain connections and stronger muscles in their hearts and other organs. Wyss-Coray is advancing this work with a company he founded called Alkahest. The company has an ongoing trial involving infusions of young blood into 18 Alzheimer?s patients. The new trial, planned by a different company called Ambrosia, is piggybacking on Wyss-Coray?s success. However, unlike Alkahest?s trial, Ambrosia?s is open to anyone over the age of 35. It aims to recruit around 600 people, who will each pay to receive blood from a person younger than 25 to study the effects. Ambrosia has already attracted investment from tech billionaire Peter Thiel, who is, as Inc. put it ?very, very interested in young people?s blood.? ------- BillK From anders at aleph.se Thu Aug 4 09:47:15 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:47:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Stanis=C5=82aw_Lem_was_there=2C_and_there=3F?= In-Reply-To: <59AD5156-FD15-4FC9-9A0C-10A1F11B1D67@gmail.com> References: <74C8A708-6F32-4EB5-BBF8-42DD5BF386D0@yahoo.com> <59AD5156-FD15-4FC9-9A0C-10A1F11B1D67@gmail.com> Message-ID: Yes, I am pretty confident in precursors. The letter doesn't mention I.J. Good's intelligence explosion 1965, or even Alan Turing's somewhat similar idea in 1951 (since they worked together at Bletchley park, maybe they chatted about it there?). Lewis Carrol has an organic simulation claim in Beyond the Looking Glass. On 2016-08-04 03:36, Dan TheBookMan wrote: >> *From:* Birger Johansson > > >> *Date:* August 3, 2016 at 2:07:46 PM PDT >> *To:* S-Lem listan > >> *Subject:* *Stanis?aw Lem was there, and there.* >> *Reply-To:* Birger Johansson > > >> >> From the letters section at New scientist: Stanis?aw Lem was there, >> and there. >> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg23130850-800-11-stanisaw-lem-was-there-and-there/ > > I think some of these things can be traced back further still, no? > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: > http://mybook.to/Gurlitt > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 11:24:37 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 07:24:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > ### Let's not discuss the elections. This is more painful than the gun > debate. > Agreed. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Thu Aug 4 09:51:29 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:51:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> Message-ID: I don't know. I honestly wonder about the meme diversity in past elite groups. Most examples I can think of were very homogeneous. Perhaps the restoration era British elite were unusual in the existence of the protestant and catholic views, except that I think that was more political standpoints. Maybe in some periods the Athenian agora was relatively diverse, but there are tricky magnification effects here since we mostly know it from a few sources. Elites tend to be small and recruited from similar backgrounds, so there is not much room for natural divergence. The cost of fundamental conflicts can be severe (normal political conflict is bad enough, disagreement on the very foundations of how a society is run is very destructive). The interesting question is how to set up systems that enable diverse elites, or to investigate what other possibilities are open. On 2016-08-04 05:49, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Anders > wrote: > >> Lack of ideological diversity among elites, the almost complete >> takeover of positions of power by politically correct cadres in a >> number of countries, is therefore a major flaw of the current >> global political system. > > What periods or places have shown ideological diversity among elites? > > > ### Perhaps I should have left out the word "current" from my post. > Indeed, as you imply, ideological purity tended to become a touchstone > of belonging to elites throughout history and today's world is not > much different from empires past. > > The one salient difference might be the homogenising influence of > media, both mass and social. Ideology spreads now more easily between > countries, increasing the risk of forming a world government at some > point. > > Rafa? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 14:14:18 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:14:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?VHJ1bXAgYXNrcyAi4oCLV2h5IENhbuKAmXQgV2UgVXNlIE51?= =?utf-8?b?Y2xlYXIgV2VhcG9ucz/igIsi4oCL?= Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > ?> ? > The office should be abolished, the White House turned into a homeless > shelter, and every last person who has served as president should be > roughly if not brutally thrown out of polite society. > ?Maybe that's what should happen, but that most certainly is not what's going to happen. What's going to happen is that in 3 months the decision will be made on which one of 2 people is going to be handed the keys to a Trident Nuclear Submarine. And one of them is a madman. And what's going to happen is that even after armageddon some people (if people haven't gone completely extinct) will still say a insecure Email server was more important.? On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Darin Sunley wrote: ?> ? > If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be > able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump > could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have > spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill > Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. > ?There is no point in pretending that Trump is just another presidential candidate, he isn't. George W Bush was as dumb as a sack of rocks and the worst president in my lifetime but he was sane, I don't think Trump is. If we have another Cuban Missile Crisis, if President Trump has to decide between being personally embarrassed and causing the extinction of the human race I don't think he will even hesitate, he will reach for his Red Telephone. ? ?> ? > "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in > and of itself. We've heard that story before. > ?No, you haven't heard that before. No sitting American president from ?either political party has ever said that one of the 2 people that will succeed him is simply unfit for office, but Obama did yesterday: *?"Donald Trump ?is unfit and woefully unprepared to be president?. ?There have been Republican presidents with whom I disagreed but I didn?t have a doubt that they could function as president?.? I think I was right and Mitt Romney and John McCain were wrong on certain policy issues but I never thought that they couldn?t do the job. And had they won, I would have been disappointed but I would have said to all Americans: this is our president and I know they?re going to abide by certain norms and rules and common sense, will observe basic decency, will have enough knowledge about economic policy and foreign policy and our constitutional traditions and rule of law that our government will work and then we?ll compete four years from now to try and win an election.? ?But that?s not the situation here.?"? * ?That is unprecedented, that is not politics as usual, that has not been said in 200 years. And it's hard to keep up with Trump, just today he said if he loses that can only mean the election was rigged and the November 8 vote illegal, and that also is not politics as usual, no presidential candidate has ever said something like that before. On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: ?> ? > Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic > terrorists, for short term political gain. > Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, and he died in 2004; George W Bush was still in his first term as president in 2004. It's true that as a senator Hillary Clinton did vote to give W the authority to invade Iraq and that was without a doubt the worst decision of her life, but at least she has the decency to be ashamed of herself now for doing so; in contrast to this day Donald Trump brags about wanting to murder the children of people he doesn't like and torturing opponents in ways that are "a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding". And it would be a bit hypocritical of me to excoriate Hillary too much for that vote because if I had been a senator back then I probably would have voted the same way, I too was dumb enough to believe that George W Bush knew what he was talking about when he said there were nuclear weapons in Iraq. ?> ? > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. > Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than at the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term political gain"? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 14:21:37 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 09:21:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Incredibly, this more or less describes a clinical trial approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For $8,000, you can buy a place in the trial which, over two days, infuses you with 1.5 liters (about 3 pints) of a young person?s blood. Then, blood samples taken before the infusion and one month later will be tested for 100 biomarkers to see if you show any signs of reversing the aging process. bill k Oh great - you know what this means, don't you? More zombie novels. bill w On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 2:52 AM, BillK wrote: > It reads like the clich?d plot of a horror novel: by ingesting the > blood of a younger person, you become younger yourself. > > Incredibly, this more or less describes a clinical trial approved by > the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For $8,000, you can buy a > place in the trial which, over two days, infuses you with 1.5 liters > (about 3 pints) of a young person?s blood. Then, blood samples taken > before the infusion and one month later will be tested for 100 > biomarkers to see if you show any signs of reversing the aging > process. > > inject-you-with-young-blood-to-see-if-it-makes-you-younger/> > > Quotes: > > The FDA has good reason to approve a trial for what seems like a > somewhat bonkers idea. A remarkable experiment in 2014 rejuvenated the > old idea of parabiosis, or giving young blood to an old person. > However, instead of just transfering blood, Tony Wyss-Coray of > Stanford University transfused young mice?s plasma?which is the > yellowish part of the blood that remains after removing platelets and > both red and white blood cells?into their older counterparts. > > The tests showed that the older mice subsequently had better brain > connections and stronger muscles in their hearts and other organs. > Wyss-Coray is advancing this work with a company he founded called > Alkahest. The company has an ongoing trial involving infusions of > young blood into 18 Alzheimer?s patients. > > The new trial, planned by a different company called Ambrosia, is > piggybacking on Wyss-Coray?s success. However, unlike Alkahest?s > trial, Ambrosia?s is open to anyone over the age of 35. It aims to > recruit around 600 people, who will each pay to receive blood from a > person younger than 25 to study the effects. > Ambrosia has already attracted investment from tech billionaire Peter > Thiel, who is, as Inc. put it ?very, very interested in young people?s > blood.? > ------- > > > > BillK > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 14:24:20 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 09:24:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 6:24 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> ### Let's not discuss the elections. This is more painful than the gun >> debate. >> > > Agreed. > > -Dave > ?agreed - bill w? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 16:28:35 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 12:28:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump_asks_=22Why_Can=E2=80=99t_We_Use_Nuclear_We?= =?utf-8?q?apons=3F=22?= Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > The office should be abolished, the White House turned into a homeless > shelter, and every last person who has served as president should be > roughly if not brutally thrown out of polite society. Maybe that's what should happen, but that most certainly is not what's going to happen. What's going to happen is that in 3 months the decision will be made on which one of 2 people is going to be handed the keys to a Trident Nuclear Submarine. And one of them is a madman. And what's going to happen is that even after armageddon some people (if people haven't gone completely extinct) will still say a insecure Email server was more important. On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Darin Sunley wrote: > If the "serious" politicians, on both sides of the aisle, wanted us to be > able to take seriously the idea that a presidential candidate like Trump > could be an existential threat to the country, they probably shouldn't have > spent the last three decades describing, in turn, Ronald Reagan, Bill > Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama as similar existential threats. There is no point in pretending that Trump is just another presidential candidate, he isn't. George W Bush was as dumb as a sack of rocks and the worst president in my lifetime but he was sane, I don't think Trump is. If we have another Cuban Missile Crisis, if President Trump has to decide between being personally embarrassed and causing the extinction of the human race I don't think he will even hesitate, he will reach for his Red Telephone. > "But this guy's /really, really/ bad!" just isn't terribly convincing, in > and of itself. We've heard that story before. No, you haven't heard that before. No sitting American president from either political party has ever said that one of the 2 people that will succeed him is simply unfit for office, but Obama did yesterday: *"Donald Trump is unfit and woefully unprepared to be president . There have been Republican presidents with whom I disagreed but I didn?t have a doubt that they could function as president . I think I was right and Mitt Romney and John McCain were wrong on certain policy issues but I never thought that they couldn?t do the job. And had they won, I would have been disappointed but I would have said to all Americans: this is our president and I know they?re going to abide by certain norms and rules and common sense, will observe basic decency, will have enough knowledge about economic policy and foreign policy and our constitutional traditions and rule of law that our government will work and then we?ll compete four years from now to try and win an election. But that?s not the situation here. " * That is unprecedented, that is not politics as usual, that has not been said in 200 years. And it's hard to keep up with Trump, just today he said if he loses that can only mean the election was rigged and the November 8 vote illegal, and that also is not politics as usual, no presidential candidate has ever said something like that before. On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic > terrorists, for short term political gain. Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, and he died in 2004; George W Bush was still in his first term as president in 2004. It's true that as a senator Hillary Clinton did vote to give W the authority to invade Iraq and that was without a doubt the worst decision of her life, but at least she has the decency to be ashamed of herself now for doing so; in contrast to this day Donald Trump brags about wanting to murder the children of people he doesn't like and torturing opponents in ways that are "a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding". And it would be a bit hypocritical of me to excoriate Hillary too much for that vote because if I had been a senator back then I probably would have voted the same way, I too was dumb enough to believe that George W Bush knew what he was talking about when he said there were nuclear weapons in Iraq. > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than at the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term political gain"? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From test at ssec.wisc.edu Thu Aug 4 17:17:23 2016 From: test at ssec.wisc.edu (Bill Hibbard) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 12:17:23 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [ExI] Trump asks "?Why Can?t We Use Nuclear Weapons??"? Message-ID: Perhaps Trump asking his question, and that fact making it into public media, is Trump's way of openning negotiations with North Korea and Iran. To be clear, I will not be voting for Mr. Trump. But it is worth recognizing that, when it comes to national security, the public facts are 50% theater. From anders at aleph.se Thu Aug 4 17:50:14 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 18:50:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues In-Reply-To: References: <8acbfa48-9e79-447b-cf21-51382c8d1823@aleph.se> <0e0fa2b4-362d-e903-6736-03fac3688f62@aleph.se> <6c6793f5-826d-2d41-b310-ef3fd92c89de@aleph.se> Message-ID: <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> Here is an interesting article by Jonathan Haidt synthesizing sociology, moral psychology and other approaches into an interesting picture of why we are currently seeing a big rise in "raise the drawbridge" conservatism/authoritarianism: http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/07/10/when-and-why-nationalism-beats-globalism/ In the US the gay marriage and trans bathroom brouhaha also fits this model. Basically, it is about a reaction to a normative threat. The essay has some interesting suggestions for tagging down the debate, basically calling for a reframing of multiculturalism. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 21:44:40 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 16:44:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues In-Reply-To: <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> References: <8acbfa48-9e79-447b-cf21-51382c8d1823@aleph.se> <0e0fa2b4-362d-e903-6736-03fac3688f62@aleph.se> <6c6793f5-826d-2d41-b310-ef3fd92c89de@aleph.se> <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> Message-ID: ?Haidt makes a lot of sense, but here is what is confusing to me: I read awhile back that 'left' and 'right' meanings in the US are just reversed in Western Europe. (No, not the traffic lanes!) So when I read 'right' in Haidt, is he referring to the 'left' and just translating it for us? Or...... bill w? On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Anders wrote: > Here is an interesting article by Jonathan Haidt synthesizing sociology, > moral psychology and other approaches into an interesting picture of why we > are currently seeing a big rise in "raise the drawbridge" > conservatism/authoritarianism: > > http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/07/10/when-and- > why-nationalism-beats-globalism/ > > In the US the gay marriage and trans bathroom brouhaha also fits this > model. Basically, it is about a reaction to a normative threat. > > The essay has some interesting suggestions for tagging down the debate, > basically calling for a reframing of multiculturalism. > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 4 22:12:16 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 15:12:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues In-Reply-To: <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> References: <8acbfa48-9e79-447b-cf21-51382c8d1823@aleph.se> <0e0fa2b4-362d-e903-6736-03fac3688f62@aleph.se> <6c6793f5-826d-2d41-b310-ef3fd92c89de@aleph.se> <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Aug 4, 2016 12:25 PM, "Anders" wrote: > Here is an interesting article by Jonathan Haidt synthesizing sociology, moral psychology and other approaches into an interesting picture of why we are currently seeing a big rise in "raise the drawbridge" conservatism/authoritarianism: > > http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/07/10/when-and-why-nationalism-beats-globalism/ > > In the US the gay marriage and trans bathroom brouhaha also fits this model. Basically, it is about a reaction to a normative threat. > > The essay has some interesting suggestions for tagging down the debate, basically calling for a reframing of multiculturalism. I wonder if calls for immigrants to respect our laws more - and opening a "work to earn your visa", where an unlimited number of immigrants could do extra labor helping pay for their assimilation which labor would also demonstrate their assimilation - might help reduce fears of immigrants. Even if we respect others' way of living, everyone must obey the same laws. (Thus the attempts to use laws to legislate inappropriate things. Shift energy away from that and toward enforcing existing laws. For example, more enforcement of rape laws means less cases where abortion is even considered.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 00:00:58 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 17:00:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Avoid the subject Message-ID: > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. > Rafa? True. However, I think the meta level of what happens when large numbers of a population are under economic stress is an important subject. Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of light. Keith From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 00:09:40 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 19:09:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Avoid the subject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of light. Keith Oh really? I can see speed of light. That does make it nearly impossible to cruise the galaxy like we fantasize about in sci-fi. But why evol. psych? After all, it got us here. What the trouble? Too slow? I would have said clinical psych, but maybe that's just not too scientific. Very depressing how little we can do in that area. Some drugs which sorta work and talk. bill w On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. > > > Rafa? > > True. However, I think the meta level of what happens when large > numbers of a population are under economic stress is an important > subject. > > Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most > depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of > light. > > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 05:41:44 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 01:41:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump_asks_=22Why_Can=E2=80=99t_We_Use_Nuclear_We?= =?utf-8?q?apons=3F=22?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:28 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic >> terrorists, for short term political gain. > > > Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, > ### That may be the case, although I did not discuss the issue with Mr Khan and I don't really know what he is thinking through all this commotion. I don't mention my opinions to the Khans or to Shaharyar. Why antagonize friends? ---------------- > > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. > > > > Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than at > the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term political > gain"? > ### Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 06:06:07 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 02:06:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political correctness consequences In-Reply-To: References: <5c367f30-4298-5601-d15a-2c6c817b032c@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 5:51 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > I don't know. I honestly wonder about the meme diversity in past elite > groups. Most examples I can think of were very homogeneous. Perhaps the > restoration era British elite were unusual in the existence of the > protestant and catholic views, except that I think that was more political > standpoints. Maybe in some periods the Athenian agora was relatively > diverse, but there are tricky magnification effects here since we mostly > know it from a few sources. > ### I agree that past elite groups tended to be very homogenous within each polity but there was a substantial amount of diversity between polities. Today that inter-polity diversity is to some extent limited by the fast diffusion of memes between polities. -------------- > The interesting question is how to set up systems that enable diverse > elites, or to investigate what other possibilities are open. > ### The system of political beliefs that enables diverse elites is classical liberalism, with its insistence on a very small number of fundamental rules (self-ownership, freedom of association, freedom of speech, non-initiation of violence) that enable a diverse and tolerant but not randomly permissive or weak society. Anybody who espouses these rules is capable of peaceful coexistence with a much wider spectrum of beliefs and attitudes than those who fail at them. Classical liberalism is compatible with conservatism, progressivism, internationalism, nationalism, even utopian socialism, which are at their core orthogonal to classical liberalism. On the other hand, the political systems that are starkly in conflict with classical liberalism are communism, fascism, Islam, some forms of fundamental Christianity, and to a large extent American liberalism. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 06:22:09 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 23:22:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Sexual response modification Message-ID: So let's take a diversion from the current threads. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/08/new-theory-suggests-female-orgasms-are-evolutionary-leftover If this theory is true, which of the following modifications might be more popular, and why? Assuming sufficiently advanced biotechnology, but these do not seem like they would require as radical a leap as some other technologies we have discussed. 1) Reverse evolution so that ovulation occurs upon orgasm. Celibate (or at least non-orgasming) females would be able to store their eggs longer (for career, et cetera), though they might take longer to mature sexually. On the flip side, deliberately getting pregnant would be easier since one could reliably induce ovulation without expensive medicines or procedures. 2) Modify the ovaries to be like the testes: constantly producing seed (egg cells, in their case). No more menopause. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 06:35:30 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 02:35:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues In-Reply-To: <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> References: <8acbfa48-9e79-447b-cf21-51382c8d1823@aleph.se> <0e0fa2b4-362d-e903-6736-03fac3688f62@aleph.se> <6c6793f5-826d-2d41-b310-ef3fd92c89de@aleph.se> <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Anders wrote: > > > The essay has some interesting suggestions for tagging down the debate, > basically calling for a reframing of multiculturalism. ### I have the impression he suggests rejecting multiculturalism, and a good riddance, too. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 5 08:07:10 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 09:07:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Avoid the subject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9da06d1a-45dc-160f-cb40-7c400dbb132c@aleph.se> On 2016-08-05 01:00, Keith Henson wrote: > Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most > depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of light. Not the rocket equation? That is my least favourite equation. (Of course, the relativistic rocket equation manages to be worse.) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 14:47:44 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 07:47:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Avoid the subject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "But why evol. psych?" I have, as you might know, applied it to war and related social disruptions. I understand why the IRA went out of business. At the root of it, the Irish women brought the birth rate down to close to replacement. With slow population growth, the income per capita went up from modest economic growth. That turned off the population support for the IRA because fighting is not good for your genes when you have a bright future. Now try imagining this happening in Saudi Arabia or any of the other Arab culture states. It's only partly Islam because Iran as fallen to about two kids per woman. We can live with the rocket equations. Global war, maybe not. Keith On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 5:09 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most > depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of > light. > Keith > > Oh really? I can see speed of light. That does make it nearly impossible > to cruise the galaxy like we fantasize about in sci-fi. > > But why evol. psych? After all, it got us here. What the trouble? Too > slow? > > I would have said clinical psych, but maybe that's just not too scientific. > Very depressing how little we can do in that area. Some drugs which sorta > work and talk. > > bill w > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Keith Henson wrote: >> >> > Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. >> >> > Rafa? >> >> True. However, I think the meta level of what happens when large >> numbers of a population are under economic stress is an important >> subject. >> >> Though I must admit I find evolutionary psychology perhaps the most >> depressing subject in science. The only thing worse is the speed of >> light. >> >> Keith >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- Best wishes, Keith "Often, I'll write things as though they are trivial and/or TRL9. I understand that this is not the case, so please forgive my lazy and informal style." Suggested by anon From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 15:22:18 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 11:22:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump_asks_=22Why_Can=E2=80=99t_We_Use_Nuclear_We?= =?utf-8?q?apons=3F=22?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >>> ?>>? >>> Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic >>> terrorists, for short term political gain. >> >> >> ?>> ? >> Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, >> > > ?> ? > ### That may be the case, although I did not discuss the issue with Mr > Khan and I don't really know what he is thinking through all this commotion. > ?I don't see why it would be necessary to discuss it with him, Mr. Khan made it abundantly clear in his speech at the Democratic? convention that nominated Hillary Clinton what his views were. And in response to Mr. Khan's speech Trump produced this self contradictory gem: *"Mr. Khan who has never met me, has no right to stand in front of millions of people and claim I have never read the Constitution, (which is false) and say many other inaccurate things."* If Donald Trump had actually read the Constitution he'd know that Mr. Khan DOES have a right to say whatever he wants in front of as many people that want to listen to him. And yet for reasons that absolutely baffle me libertarians seem to have a certain fondness for this fascist. It's weird. And yes I know many libertarians intend to vote for Gary Johnson, but it takes 270 electoral votes to become president and I will give 3 to 1 odds that Johnson will not get one single electoral vote. Johnson will get zero votes, zip nada zilch goose egg. > >>> ?>>? >>> Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. >> >> >> ?>> ? >> Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than >> at the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term >> political gain"? >> > > ?> ? > ### Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. > ?I've seen this before, after a long post on subject X it ENDS with something like, "we should never talk about subject X again", which really means I and only I should have the last word on subject X. It would be far more convincing if the FIRST and only sentence in the post was " Let's avoid subject ?X? on this list ?", I'd still disagree but at least it wouldn't be self contradictory.? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 17:46:22 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 13:46:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump_asks_=22Why_Can=E2=80=99t_We_Use_Nuclear_We?= =?utf-8?q?apons=3F=22?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The second sentence of my post is: Let's avoid discussing the elections on this list. The last sentence of my post is: I won't further respond to any election-related posts from you. On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:22 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>> ?>>? >>>> Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic >>>> terrorists, for short term political gain. >>> >>> >>> ?>> ? >>> Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, >>> >> >> ?> ? >> ### That may be the case, although I did not discuss the issue with Mr >> Khan and I don't really know what he is thinking through all this commotion. >> > > ?I don't see why it would be necessary to discuss it with him, Mr. Khan > made it abundantly clear in his speech at the Democratic? convention that > nominated Hillary Clinton what his views were. And in response to Mr. > Khan's speech Trump produced this self contradictory gem: > > *"Mr. Khan who has never met me, has no right to stand in front of > millions of people and claim I have never read the Constitution, (which is > false) and say many other inaccurate things."* > > If Donald Trump had actually read the Constitution he'd know that Mr. Khan > DOES have a right to say whatever he wants in front of as many people that > want to listen to him. And yet for reasons that absolutely baffle me > libertarians seem to have a certain fondness for this fascist. It's weird. > And yes I know many libertarians intend to vote for Gary Johnson, but it > takes 270 electoral votes to become president and I will give 3 to 1 odds > that Johnson will not get one single electoral vote. Johnson will get zero > votes, zip nada zilch goose egg. > > > >>>> ?>>? >>>> Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. >>> >>> >>> ?>> ? >>> Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than >>> at the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term >>> political gain"? >>> >> >> ?> ? >> ### Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. >> > > ?I've seen this before, after a long post on subject X it ENDS with > something like, "we should never talk about subject X again", which really > means I and only I should have the last word on subject X. It would be far > more convincing if the FIRST and only sentence in the post was " > Let's avoid subject > ?X? > on this list > ?", I'd still disagree but at least it wouldn't be self contradictory.? > > John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 18:09:32 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 14:09:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Sexual response modification In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > So let's take a diversion from the current threads. > > http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/08/new-theory- > suggests-female-orgasms-are-evolutionary-leftover > > If this theory is true, which of the following modifications might be more > popular, and why? Assuming sufficiently advanced biotechnology, but these > do not seem like they would require as radical a leap as some other > technologies we have discussed. > > 1) Reverse evolution so that ovulation occurs upon orgasm. Celibate (or > at least non-orgasming) females would be able to store their eggs longer > (for career, et cetera), though they might take longer to mature sexually. > On the flip side, deliberately getting pregnant would be easier since one > could reliably induce ovulation without expensive medicines or procedures. > > 2) Modify the ovaries to be like the testes: constantly producing seed > (egg cells, in their case). No more menopause. > ### There is a limited number of primordial ova in the ovary, and although the precise reason for this arrangement is not definitely known, the hypothesis that I favor goes as follows: Mitochondrial DNA quality is crucial for the normal functioning of the organism. During cell division there is ample opportunity to accumulate mitochondrial mutations by random drift, and normal cellular metabolism also contributes to mtDNA mutations. Since you don't want to let your offspring inherit faulty mtDNA, the germ cell that contains it must be then appropriately protected, and in humans only the primordial ovum carries mtDNA. Primordial ova are very peculiar cells, with suppressed metabolism, non-dividing, large (makes random drift in mtDNA less problematic), which appears to be ideal kind of cell to keep mtDNA safe. But mtDNA still undergoes decay, which is why the average quality of ova goes down from age 25 onward, hundreds of thousands of them are automatically culled at mitochondrial metabolic checkpoints, until at age 40 most women become infertile from an exhaustion of ova. Sperms to not carry mtDNA, and therefore the constraints that apply to ova are not relevant to them. Changing ova production to match sperm in amount and duration would require some quite advanced biological tinkering. Rafa? Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 18:58:43 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 14:58:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump_asks_=22Why_Can=E2=80=99t_We_Use_Nuclear_We?= =?utf-8?q?apons=3F=22?= Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >> Hillary Clinton sent Humayun to his death at the hands of Islamic >>> terrorists, for short term political gain. >> >> > >> Apparently Humayun Khan's parents don't agree with you, > > > ### That may be the case, although I did not discuss the issue with Mr > Khan and I don't really know what he is thinking through all this commotion. I don't see why it would be necessary to discuss it with him, Mr. Khan made it abundantly clear in his speech at the Democratic convention that nominated Hillary Clinton what his views were. And in response to Mr. Khan's speech Trump produced this self contradictory gem: *"Mr. Khan who has never met me, has no right to stand in front of millions of people and claim I have never read the Constitution, (which is false) and say many other inaccurate things."* If Donald Trump had actually read the Constitution he'd know that Mr. Khan DOES have a right to say whatever he wants in front of as many people that want to listen to him. And yet for reasons that absolutely baffle me libertarians seem to have a certain fondness for this fascist. It's weird. And yes I know many libertarians intend to vote for Gary Johnson, but it takes 270 electoral votes to become president and I will give 3 to 1 odds that Johnson will not get one single electoral vote. Johnson will get zero votes, zip nada zilch goose egg. > >> Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. It is odious. >> >> >> Shouldn't you have said that at the very start of your post rather than >> at the very end after talking about Hillary Clinton and "short term >> political gain"? > > > ### Let's avoid the subject of elections on this list. I've seen this before, after a long post on subject X it ENDS with something like, "we should never talk about subject X again", which really means I and only I should have the last word on subject X. It would be far more convincing if the FIRST and only sentence in the post was " Let's avoid subject X on this list ", I'd still disagree but at least it wouldn't be self contradictory. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 6 00:26:52 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 19:26:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] ovary Message-ID: I read in Discover magazine that a woman facing chemotherapy had one ovary removed and cryofrozen to protect the eggs. I am assuming that this is of interest to some in the group. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sat Aug 6 03:46:27 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 20:46:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news Message-ID: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> http://on.io9.com/1F00tSo Could it just be something rather mundane but rare to actually see in such detail, such as the aftermath of a planet falling into the star? Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Aug 6 05:05:06 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 22:05:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> References: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> Message-ID: I made a couple of comments. Keith On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > http://on.io9.com/1F00tSo > > Could it just be something rather mundane but rare to actually see in such > detail, such as the aftermath of a planet falling into the star? > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: > http://mybook.to/Gurlitt > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- Best wishes, Keith "Often, I'll write things as though they are trivial and/or TRL9. I understand that this is not the case, so please forgive my lazy and informal style." Suggested by anon From anders at aleph.se Sat Aug 6 12:43:28 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 13:43:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> References: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <868ea11c-0e20-f60e-9a6f-648c470dc5c7@aleph.se> A planet shouldn't dim a star much. To dim it you need to reduce the rate of fusion reactions, typically by making it less dense - planets instead add opaque and dense "metals" (astronomer slang for "not hydrogen and helium") that heat things up. Besides, the components of a dissolved planet would take ages to reach the core. I think the cause is some mundane astrophysics, but there is room for a lot of weird effects from mundane astrophysics. Just consider stellar oscillations, where all sorts of nonlinear things happen. Maybe this is the first case of a super-long periodic variable. I was squinting at the light curve and trying to get it to fit my conception of Dyson-building, and I cannot get it to fit any rational approach I can see. Of course, you can build megastructures just for fun or according to a random schedule. On 2016-08-06 04:46, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > http://on.io9.com/1F00tSo > > Could it just be something rather mundane but rare to actually see in > such detail, such as the aftermath of a planet falling into the star? > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: > http://mybook.to/Gurlitt > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Aug 6 12:51:48 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 13:51:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] ovary In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yup. People are doing this more and more. http://oncofertility.northwestern.edu/resources/ovarian-tissue-cryopreservation-otc There was a baby born from a frozen ovary in Edinburgh last month: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-36793572 Even more radical is testis cryopreservation, intended to help prepubertal boys undergoing chemotherapy have a chance of becoming fathers: http://oncofertility.northwestern.edu/resources/testicular-tissue-cryopreservation http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/31234/InTech-Cryopreservation_of_testicular_tissue.pdf It works in mice, at least: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140701/ncomms5320/abs/ncomms5320.html I am involved in a loose network at Oxford University looking into cryopreservation - mostly modelling and ethics in my case - and a fair number of the members are reproductive biologists/doctors. On 2016-08-06 01:26, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I read in Discover magazine that a woman facing chemotherapy had one > ovary removed and cryofrozen to protect the eggs. > > I am assuming that this is of interest to some in the group. > > bill w > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Aug 6 14:58:07 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 07:58:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news Message-ID: Replied on Gizmodo Interesting thoughts. I kind of suspect that nobody can ever do FTL spaceflight. It?s a big universe, but if someone had that, they would be all over. _Subjective_ warp drive is another matter, you just slow down your clock. 10^-8 slowdown would let you cross the galaxy in a subjective day. However, it may be worth considering that it isn?t an F type star, just some lower temperature star that has been largely englobed by a couple of hemespheres of light sails. What we are seeing could be a heated up star between the gap on the local ecliptic to illuminate planets. Now we only need a plausible reason for aliens to want a hotter star! Keith PS. This idea came up back in the late 70s or early 80s when Eric Drexler proposed to use a hemesphere of light sails to turn a star into a fusion-photon drive. PPS. Another question, can you think of any way to tell the difference between a real F star and one heated up by reflectors? -- Best wishes, Keith From anders at aleph.se Sat Aug 6 20:04:28 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 21:04:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2016-08-06 15:58, Keith Henson wrote: > PPS. Another question, can you think of any way to tell the difference > between a real F star and one heated up by reflectors? Let's see. If we had orbiting stuff, we could estimate the mass and see whether that, the luminosity and the spectral type matched the main sequence. I think rotation can be estimated using doppler-broadening, and that also gives constraints on mass. A heated smaller star would rotate more slowly. I think there would also be spectral differences due to how quickly they evolve and the convective behavior: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/169 -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Aug 7 20:47:11 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 13:47:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: <868ea11c-0e20-f60e-9a6f-648c470dc5c7@aleph.se> References: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> <868ea11c-0e20-f60e-9a6f-648c470dc5c7@aleph.se> Message-ID: <6572DA87-D061-424A-9732-F33FBA24CBA5@gmail.com> Just pure speculation on my part, but I was thinking a large object -- say a big Jupiter or a brown dwarf -- falls into the star X years ago -- where X is the number of years needed for it to dim the star enough. (In other words, we're not seeing the actual collision, but only the aftermath (even adding to light travel time and all that), however long that took. Of course, this is adjusting the hypothesis to fit the data, but that's not verboten, right? All one need do then is look for independent evidence of this -- as opposed to just adding ever more epicycles.) I'm only offering this up as a speculation here too. I don't know what happened, and you might be correct. It's simply something rather mundane going on. All the neat stuff -- if you like that sort of thing* -- in Saturn's rings seems to be caused by collisions and gravity rather than anything exotic. I'm guessing the folks doing this work are looking at similar stars to see if there's some pattern or whether Tabby's Star is unique. Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at:http://mybook.to/Gurlitt * I don't. I find these planetary rings garish. From: Anders To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Saturday, August 6, 2016 5:43 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news A planet shouldn't dim a star much. To dim it you need to reduce the rate of fusion reactions, typically by making it less dense - planets instead add opaque and dense "metals" (astronomer slang for "not hydrogen and helium") that heat things up. Besides, the components of a dissolved planet would take ages to reach the core. I think the cause is some mundane astrophysics, but there is room for a lot of weird effects from mundane astrophysics. Just consider stellar oscillations, where all sorts of nonlinear things happen. Maybe this is the first case of a super-long periodic variable. I was squinting at the light curve and trying to get it to fit my conception of Dyson-building, and I cannot get it to fit any rational approach I can see. Of course, you can build megastructures just for fun or according to a random schedule. On 2016-08-06 04:46, Dan TheBookMan wrote: http://on.io9.com/1F00tSo Could it just be something rather mundane but rare to actually see in such detail, such as the aftermath of a planet falling into the star? -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From robot at ultimax.com Sun Aug 7 20:59:44 2016 From: robot at ultimax.com (Robert G Kennedy III, PE) Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2016 16:59:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2016-08-06 16:20, Keith Henson wrote: > Interesting thoughts. I kind of suspect that nobody can ever do FTL > spaceflight. It?s a big universe, but if someone had that, they would > be all over. _ There's a paper coming out in JBIS about that very idea. > PS. This idea came up back in the late 70s or early 80s when Eric > Drexler proposed to use a hemesphere of light sails to turn a star > into a fusion-photon drive. A Russian named Shkadov proposed a "stellar engine" to do that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_engine "Stellar engine From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Shkadov thruster) "Stellar engines are a class of hypothetical megastructures which use a star's radiation to create usable energy. Some variants use this energy to produce thrust, and thus accelerate a star, and anything orbiting it, in a given direction. The creation of such a system would make its builders a Type-II civilization on the Kardashev scale. "There are three variant classes of this idea. "Class A (Shkadov thruster) "One of the simplest examples of stellar engine is the Shkadov thruster (named after Dr. Leonid Mikhailovich Shkadov who first proposed it), or a Class A stellar engine.[1, from 1987] Such an engine is a stellar propulsion system, consisting of an enormous mirror/light sail?actually a massive type of solar statite large enough to classify as a megastructure, probably by an order of magnitude?which would balance gravitational attraction towards and radiation pressure away from the star. " Some stuff further down in the art about similar concepts in Olaf Stapledon's fiction from the 1930s. -- Robert G Kennedy III, PE www.ultimax.com 1994 AAAS/ASME Congressional Fellow U.S. House Subcommittee on Space From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 7 21:27:54 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 22:27:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: <6572DA87-D061-424A-9732-F33FBA24CBA5@gmail.com> References: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> <868ea11c-0e20-f60e-9a6f-648c470dc5c7@aleph.se> <6572DA87-D061-424A-9732-F33FBA24CBA5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <371cac48-cfa8-6e69-e607-4a5f9b5a1d53@aleph.se> Remember that when a planet makes a transit, it can reduce the light by a factor of 1%. Put it in the atmosphere and it soon heats up to about the same temperature, reducing the light a lot less. (How soon? Jupiter is 0.000949 of the sun's mass. Most of it is *hotter* than the sun's surface, so freed from gravitational confinement the core will definitely mix pretty explosively - the gravitational binding energy of 2e33 J is about 62 days of solar energy production... I would say the result would be transient and bright. A terrestrial world would just dissolve in a few hours.) One way of detecting recently swallowed planets is to look for Li6: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stars-swallow-planets-and/ On 2016-08-07 21:47, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > Just pure speculation on my part, but I was thinking a large object -- say a big Jupiter or a brown dwarf -- falls into the star X years ago -- where X is the number of years needed for it to dim the star enough. (In other words, we're not seeing the actual collision, but only the aftermath (even adding to light travel time and all that), however long that took. Of course, this is adjusting the hypothesis to fit the data, but that's not verboten, right? All one need do then is look for independent evidence of this -- as opposed to just adding ever more epicycles.) > > I'm only offering this up as a speculation here too. I don't know what happened, and you might be correct. It's simply something rather mundane going on. All the neat stuff -- if you like that sort of thing* -- in Saturn's rings seems to be caused by collisions and gravity rather than anything exotic. > > I'm guessing the folks doing this work are looking at similar stars to see if there's some pattern or whether Tabby's Star is unique. > > Regards, > > Dan > > Sample my latest Kindle book, > > "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at:http://mybook.to/Gurlitt > > * I don't. I find these planetary rings garish. > > From: Anders To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Sent: Saturday, August 6, 2016 5:43 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news > > A planet shouldn't dim a star much. To dim it you need to reduce the rate of fusion reactions, typically by making it less dense - planets instead add opaque and dense "metals" (astronomer slang for "not hydrogen and helium") that heat things up. Besides, the components of a dissolved planet would take ages to reach the core. > > I think the cause is some mundane astrophysics, but there is room > for a lot of weird effects from mundane astrophysics. Just consider > stellar oscillations, where all sorts of nonlinear things happen. > Maybe this is the first case of a super-long periodic variable. > > I was squinting at the light curve and trying to get it to fit my > conception of Dyson-building, and I cannot get it to fit any > rational approach I can see. Of course, you can build megastructures > just for fun or according to a random schedule. > > > On 2016-08-06 04:46, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > > http://on.io9.com/1F00tSo > > Could it just be something rather mundane but rare to actually > see in such detail, such as the aftermath of a planet falling > into the star? > > -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 8 03:57:19 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 20:57:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg >?Spike, what state do you live in? Or if that's too much information to give, do you live in a state that always, always goes for the Democratic candidate? California. If it is close here, it isn?t close. California, New York and Texas are all free states. Vote your conscience if you live in one of them. There are other free states. >?As I said in the other thread, Trump is an anti-learning candidate that any person who values knowledge should be embarrassed to take any action or lack of action that would help him get elected. Also, any person who values not having the Earth turn into a post-apocalyptic nuclear wasteland... Ja, Trump is anti-learning, Clinton is anti-honesty, either candidate, if victorious, will turn into their own party?s worst nightmare. Trump will not stop making silly and scary comments, and Clinton?s past won?t stop pounding on her (it will get worse.) That yoga will leak out, even after the election, regardless of how the election comes out. We will find out what is in there which was sufficiently incriminating that she erased it while under subpoena. You know it had to be way worse than whatever was in Nixon?s 18 minutes of erased audio. Trump?s finances will come out somehow, perhaps the IRS will leak it. Oh I love government transparency, even if involuntary. Regarding nuclear wasteland, you do make a good point: we have entered an age when those nukes don?t need to be on a hair trigger. We should take out of the president?s hands the ability to launch those. They won?t tell us the current procedure, but I would think a review board should be convened before an attack can be launched. We have subs, so the justification for quick launch is over now. The Cold War is behind us, thank evolution. If Trump or Clinton wins the election, we will have a president widely disliked and distrusted. But there might be a downside to that as well. So we should take action to remove the ability to launch nuclear attacks from a single person or even two. It should require about nine people, with reps from both houses of the legislature, the head of the SCOTUS, someone outside of government, have everything video recorded. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 8 04:25:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 21:25:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0c5701d1f12c$efadb9d0$cf092d70$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial It reads like the clich?d plot of a horror novel: by ingesting the blood of a younger person, you become younger yourself.... ------- BillK _______________________________________________ Oh my it will be such fun if it works: the scientific community will be in debt to a story line from The Simpsons from over a quarter of a century ago. Mr. Burns becomes ill with hypohemia and needs a transfusion, but has the super-rare fictional type double O negative. Bart is the only person in Springfield with double O negative. The transfusion not only saves Burns' life but he feels wonderful, youthful again. Chaos ensues. spike From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 8 04:56:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 21:56:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues In-Reply-To: References: <8acbfa48-9e79-447b-cf21-51382c8d1823@aleph.se> <0e0fa2b4-362d-e903-6736-03fac3688f62@aleph.se> <6c6793f5-826d-2d41-b310-ef3fd92c89de@aleph.se> <74aeacb4-fd1e-cd4b-4401-4a82b938f312@aleph.se> Message-ID: <0c6b01d1f131$2cf48950$86dd9bf0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 3:12 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues On Aug 4, 2016 12:25 PM, "Anders" > wrote: >>? Here is an interesting article by Jonathan Haidt synthesizing sociology? > The essay has some interesting suggestions for tagging down the debate, basically calling for a reframing of multiculturalism. >?I wonder if calls for immigrants to respect our laws more - and opening a "work to earn your visa", where an unlimited number of immigrants could do extra labor helping pay for their assimilation which labor would also demonstrate their assimilation - might help reduce fears of immigrants? Ja, but how does that notion do in an era where there is less need for labor? The classic California example is immigrants from Mexico doing lawn work. But in the recent drought, plenty of people took out their lawns, with no plans to put them back when it starts raining again (water rates went way up, and they will never come back down.) If minimum wage goes up, as it probably will, many more low-end jobs will be automated. Then what do immigrants do? >?Even if we respect others' way of living, everyone must obey the same laws. (Thus the attempts to use laws to legislate inappropriate things. Shift energy away from that and toward enforcing existing laws. For example, more enforcement of rape laws means less cases where abortion is even considered.) I am watching how Europe will deal with their immigrant neighborhoods. Here in the USA we are already getting zones in which the police can?t go. What happens to enforcement in those areas? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon Aug 8 07:28:38 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 08:28:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial In-Reply-To: <0c5701d1f12c$efadb9d0$cf092d70$@att.net> References: <0c5701d1f12c$efadb9d0$cf092d70$@att.net> Message-ID: <0eb76d79-f5bd-6475-948d-b403454960f1@aleph.se> The fun thing with the Simpsons and Futurama is that the creators are quite savvy on many research topics*. Parabiosis is *way* older; Paul Bert got a prize for it 1866. While much interest is in some of the proteins being exchanged, I suspect the biggest effect is correcting homeostasis. We'll see. * The Futurama mind-switching theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prisoner_of_Benda#The_theorem is another cool example. On 2016-08-08 05:25, spike wrote: >> ... On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial > > It reads like the clich?d plot of a horror novel: by ingesting the blood of a younger person, you become younger yourself.... > ------- > BillK > > _______________________________________________ > > > Oh my it will be such fun if it works: the scientific community will be in debt to a story line from The Simpsons from over a quarter of a century ago. Mr. Burns becomes ill with hypohemia and needs a transfusion, but has the super-rare fictional type double O negative. Bart is the only person in Springfield with double O negative. The transfusion not only saves Burns' life but he feels wonderful, youthful again. Chaos ensues. > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 8 15:17:51 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 08:17:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news In-Reply-To: <6572DA87-D061-424A-9732-F33FBA24CBA5@gmail.com> References: <1E945679-D389-41D5-8278-01A2CA3476DE@gmail.com> <868ea11c-0e20-f60e-9a6f-648c470dc5c7@aleph.se> <6572DA87-D061-424A-9732-F33FBA24CBA5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0d7e01d1f188$083cbea0$18b63be0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dan TheBookMan Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2016 1:47 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] More Tabby's Star news >...Just pure speculation on my part, but I was thinking a large object -- say a big Jupiter or a brown dwarf -- falls into the star X years ago -- where X is the number of years needed for it to dim the star enough. (In other words, we're not seeing the actual collision, but only the aftermath (even adding to light travel time and all that), however long that took. Of course, this is adjusting the hypothesis to fit the data, but that's not verboten, right? All one need do then is look for independent evidence of this -- as opposed to just adding ever more epicycles.)...Dan Ja, that came to my mind as well. If a big rocky planet was in a highly elliptical orbit, then something took off some angular momentum right out close to its aphelion, then its perihelion would be pushed in closer to the star. If it came in close enough to interact with the star's atmosphere, it could scrub off momentum on each pass, so the aphelion would drop and the orbit frequency increase with each orbit. Rocky and metallic stuff would boil off in each pass, creating a bunch of orbiting debris, all of which would remain in orbit around the star in varying orbit periods. A slight possibility is that we happened to catch the event in realtime, like the Google Maps car catching an image of a streaker: a rare event that once in a long while is seen, given sufficient observation. My fond hope is that we are seeing a developing Kardashev 3 civilization, but my best guess on Tabby's star is that we witnessed a rare example of a rocky planet falling into a star. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 8 21:45:57 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 17:45:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Birdbrains Message-ID: We've talked before about how smart birds are, in a new article Olkowicz et al found that crows jays and ravens have twice as many neurons per volume of brain as humans do, and the shorter inter-neural distances results in faster informational speeds too. I suppose when there is evolutionary pressure for a flying animal to get smarter because of the weight considerations it can't just take the brute force approach and make the brain bigger, it must make the brain better. I wouldn't be surprised if birds have less spaghetti code in how the neurons are wired together than humans do too ?;? if so they would be ideal subjects for brain research. http://www.pnas.org/content/113/26/7255.full John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 8 22:39:37 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 15:39:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Birdbrains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008701d1f1c5$bf080440$3d180cc0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 2:46 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Birdbrains >?We've talked before about how smart birds are, in a new article Olkowicz et al found that crows jays and ravens have twice as many neurons per volume of brain as humans do, and the shorter inter-neural distances results in faster informational speeds too. I suppose when there is evolutionary pressure for a flying animal to get smarter because of the weight considerations it can't just take the brute force approach and make the brain bigger, it must make the brain better. I wouldn't be surprised if birds have less spaghetti code in how the neurons are wired together than humans do too ?;? if so they would be ideal subjects for brain research. http://www.pnas.org/content/113/26/7255.full John K Clark Ja, and that group is fun to watch. Last week at a camping trip, we were having lunch at a picnic area. The Steller?s jays were squawking and asking for a handout. We were being good wildlife conscious hikers and didn?t give them anything. I was holding a granola bar in my hand. A feathery bahstid swooped down and snatched it out of my hand. {8^D I was laughing too hard to be pissed about my trail food going down his gullet. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 00:29:51 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 19:29:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] free speech on campus article Message-ID: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/07/education/edlife/fire-first-amendment-on-campus-free-speech.html?_r=0 The 'right' sort of liberals are fighting back. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 12:00:02 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:00:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More economist failures Message-ID: Economists Mystified that Negative Interest Rates Aren?t Leading Consumers to Run Out and Spend August 9, 2016 Quotes: Not only has it been remarkable to witness the casual way in which central banks have plunged into negative interest rate terrain, based on questionable models. Now that this experiment isn?t working out so well, the response comes troubling close to, ?Well, they work in theory, so we just need to do more or wait longer to see them succeed.? Policy makers in Europe and Japan have turned to negative rates for the same reason?to stimulate their lackluster economies. Yet the results have left some economists scratching their heads. Instead of opening their wallets, many consumers and businesses are squirreling away more money. When Ms. Hofmann heard the ECB was knocking rates below zero in June 2014, she considered it ?madness? and promptly cut her spending, set aside more money and bought gold. ?I now need to save more than before to have enough to retire,? says Ms. Hofmann, 54 years old. Recent economic data show consumers are saving more in Germany and Japan, and in Denmark, Switzerland and Sweden, three non-eurozone countries with negative rates, savings are at their highest since 1995, People save for emergencies and retirement. Economists, who are great proponents of using central bank interest rate manipulation to create a wealth effect, fail to understand that super low rates diminish the wealth of ordinary savers. Few will react the way speculators do and go into risky assets to chase yield. They will stay put, lower their spending to try to compensate for their reduced interest income. Those who are still working will also try to increase their savings balances, since they know their assets will generate very little in the way of income in a zero/negative interest rate environment. It is apparently difficult for most economists to grasp that negative interest rates reduce the value of those savings to savers by lowering the income on them. Savers are loss averse and thus are very reluctant to spend principal to compensate for reduced income. Given that central banks have driven policy interest rates into negative real interest rate terrain, this isn?t an illogical reading of their situation. The second effect is that of inflation signaling. Again, consumers are reacting correctly to the message central banks are sending. Negative interest rates signal deflationary tendencies and that central banks think deflation is a real risk. And what is the rational way to behave in deflation? Hang on to your cash, because goods and services will be cheaper later. -------------- As I suspected might happen. I wonder if central banks will continue with low and negative interest rates when it starts driving pension schemes bankrupt? BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 15:45:14 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 10:45:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech Message-ID: Given the incredible state of the art in some tech, I wonder if my fantasy tool has come into being. Consider the sculpture of David in Florence. What if it fell somehow? Could it be reproduced in tiny detail? Of course three D images are routine, I suppose, and the resolution could take it down to the millimeter level. So here is my question to any of you who are up on these things: could a robot duplicate David? Equipped with the 3D and tools to chip/sand/whatever away marble or granite? If so, then of course new sculpture could be created on some software and created by robots. I am guessing that if the technology does not exist now, it soon will. What do any of you know about this? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 16:25:58 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 17:25:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 9 August 2016 at 16:45, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Given the incredible state of the art in some tech, I wonder if my fantasy > tool has come into being. > > Consider the sculpture of David in Florence. What if it fell somehow? > Could it be reproduced in tiny detail? > > Of course three D images are routine, I suppose, and the resolution could > take it down to the millimeter level. > > So here is my question to any of you who are up on these things: could a > robot duplicate David? Equipped with the 3D and tools to chip/sand/whatever > away marble or granite? > > If so, then of course new sculpture could be created on some software and > created by robots. > I am guessing that if the technology does not exist now, it soon will. > Heh! :) You are over-thinking this problem. There are already thousands of copies of David around the world. I think they just make a cast from the original and produce lots of copies. This is done for other art works as well. I've got the Mona Lisa hanging in my dining room. :) BillK From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 9 16:46:05 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 09:46:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace ? >?Consider the sculpture of David in Florence. What if it fell somehow? Could it be reproduced in tiny detail?...Of course three D images are routine, I suppose, and the resolution could take it down to the millimeter level? bill w Ja, the tech already exists BillW. A pair of pinpoint lasers at a known angle are moved fore and aft until they overlap, creating a 3D file at higher resolution than millimeter, although I don?t know what accuracy we would get if we tried in on something the scale of David. You would need a super-rigid support structure for the laser theodolite. Such a device can be found in Lockheed?s Palo Alto Research Center. Dentists use them to create exact copies of existing dentures. With that data file, we could 3D print David, then even put a surface on the polycarbonate copy which looks a lot like marble. We could send an important message to the world by digitally uncircumcising him (or is it decircumcising?) Then while you distract the guards, BillK swaps the copy for the original, sneak out the back, guards never notice until the next day when the curator shrieks and faints. Then we take the original, him set him up at the ribbon cutting at the local nudist colony. Oh we could have such fun with this. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 18:41:22 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:41:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:46 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *?* > > > > >?Consider the sculpture of David in Florence. What if it fell somehow? > Could it be reproduced in tiny detail?...Of course three D images are > routine, I suppose, and the resolution could take it down to the millimeter > level? bill w > > > > > > Ja, the tech already exists BillW. A pair of pinpoint lasers at a known > angle are moved fore and aft until they overlap, creating a 3D file at > higher resolution than millimeter, although I don?t know what accuracy we > would get if we tried in on something the scale of David. You would need a > super-rigid support structure for the laser theodolite. Such a device can > be found in Lockheed?s Palo Alto Research Center. Dentists use them to > create exact copies of existing dentures. > > > > With that data file, we could 3D print David, then even put a surface on > the polycarbonate copy which looks a lot like marble. We could send an > important message to the world by digitally uncircumcising him (or is it > decircumcising?) Then while you distract the guards, BillK swaps the copy > for the original, sneak out the back, guards never notice until the next > day when the curator shrieks and faints. Then we take the original, him > set him up at the ribbon cutting at the local nudist colony. Oh we could > have such fun with this. > > > > spike > ?I thought it might be as you say. As for fun, I hear of a gay nightclub > in Vegas that has a statue of David whose crotch is covered by a fig > leaf?. Once an hour it lifts, accompanied by hoots and clapping. > ?Now who would want a gentile David?? ?I think it would be a great idea to have something like you describe for home use. I'd love to play with wood in a way that my back won't let me do now. I guess lasers are just too expensive.? ?bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 9 21:52:43 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 14:52:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> Message-ID: <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:41 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] save the art tech On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:46 AM, spike > wrote: ?We could send an important message to the world by digitally uncircumcising him (or is it decircumcising?)? spike ? ?>?Now who would want a gentile David?... Meeeeeeeeee! It would be a valuable lesson to Jews: you don?t need to cut away healthy flesh to be in the club. Those who would claim to be carriers of ethical values could lead out by refusing to make irreversible and dubious decisions for their infants based on tradition, which itself was based on enabling of mass murder (convince the local tribe to circumcise the men, then come back a couple days later and slay them all.) ? >?I think it would be a great idea to have something like you describe for home use? Depending on the accuracy needed, the setup need not be out of reach for home use. I used to have a theodolite I picked up used on eBay for 58 bucks. >? I'd love to play with wood in a way that my back won't let me do now. I guess lasers are just too expensive.? bill w? OK let us ponder then. Suppose we have a theodolite with twin lasers, some kind of homebrew arrangement, so that we can create a 3D file of an art object, and we place it on a turntable of some sort, so that we can turn it a milliradian, measure a distance, turn, measure, repeat until we go full circle, raise it a millimeter, repeat, let it run until we get the file. Now we take a wood pillar, set it on the same turntable, mount surgical lasers, have them burn away the surface of the wood in such a way that there is little penetration, a pulse for instance that would vaporize the top tenth of a mm in a spot a mm in diameter. Turn, repeat, until a wooden David emerges. Never a human hand touches the work. Once that file is made, we can burn arbitrarily many Davids, scale them, surgically restore his manhood and so on. Good thinking BillW! spike _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 9 23:06:39 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 18:06:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> Message-ID: OK. Now. Probably possible: creating a 3 D image from a 2D image. (Maybe by combining several 2D images?) If you can do that, you could turn a simple photo (Photo-shopped of course) into a wood (or ??) sculpture. It may be that some other substance than wood may do better or be more pleasing. I can see this making a lot of money. People can turn some of the zillions of selfies into their own bust. Or their dog or the pinup girl of their dreams........ Then I suppose the sculpture could be cast in bronze or ??? Cost of lasers prohibitive? But eventually everything comes down in price. Are there laws against lasers of certain strengths? bill w On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:52 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:41 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] save the art tech > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:46 AM, spike wrote: > > *?*We could send an important message to the world by digitally > uncircumcising him (or is it decircumcising?)? > > spike > > ? > > > > ?>?Now who would want a gentile David?... > > > > Meeeeeeeeee! > > > > It would be a valuable lesson to Jews: you don?t need to cut away healthy > flesh to be in the club. Those who would claim to be carriers of ethical > values could lead out by refusing to make irreversible and dubious > decisions for their infants based on tradition, which itself was based on > enabling of mass murder (convince the local tribe to circumcise the men, > then come back a couple days later and slay them all.) > > > > ? > > >?I think it would be a great idea to have something like you describe > for home use? > > > > Depending on the accuracy needed, the setup need not be out of reach for > home use. I used to have a theodolite I picked up used on eBay for 58 > bucks. > > > > >? I'd love to play with wood in a way that my back won't let me do > now. I guess lasers are just too expensive.? bill w? > > > > OK let us ponder then. Suppose we have a theodolite with twin lasers, > some kind of homebrew arrangement, so that we can create a 3D file of an > art object, and we place it on a turntable of some sort, so that we can > turn it a milliradian, measure a distance, turn, measure, repeat until we > go full circle, raise it a millimeter, repeat, let it run until we get the > file. > > > > Now we take a wood pillar, set it on the same turntable, mount surgical > lasers, have them burn away the surface of the wood in such a way that > there is little penetration, a pulse for instance that would vaporize the > top tenth of a mm in a spot a mm in diameter. Turn, repeat, until a wooden > David emerges. Never a human hand touches the work. Once that file is > made, we can burn arbitrarily many Davids, scale them, surgically restore > his manhood and so on. Good thinking BillW! > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 10 01:26:43 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 18:26:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More economist failures In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 5:00 AM, BillK wrote: > I wonder if central banks will continue > with low and negative interest rates when it starts driving pension > schemes bankrupt? > Assuming that happens (which it might, but I don't have good data one way or another), I'd say "because" instead of "when". "Pensioners, you can either hang on to this bankrupt (implication: not going to give you anything forever, ignoring chance of recovery) scheme which is costing us a lot, or accept this alternative that costs us much less." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 9 21:52:56 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 22:52:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Low-res versions are already available for 3D printing, https://sketchfab.com/models/8f4827cf36964a17b90bad11f48298ac A laser scan was done in 2009, a tour de force at the time: https://graphics.stanford.edu/data/mich/ Today the serious projects like http://www.digitalsculpture.org/ and http://www.newpalmyra.org/ can do much better. And there are intriguing stunts like http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/arts/design/nefertiti-3-d-scanning-project-in-germany-raises-doubts.html?_r=0 Manufacturing the David is another matter. Sure, you can 3D print him, but it is tricky to do on a big scale (7 meters!) and most printable materials are not like his marble. Ahh, that marble... so sexy. Sure, the lad is lovely, but that translucent Carrara marble with its luscious subsurface scattering... sorry, have to run and read a geology textbook! OK, what I'm getting at is CNC machining. Check out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p-nTYKPo_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uda0pPCVGd4 The tricky part is calculating a milling scheme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OtSHmLSy1E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1VDHF9yM1o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn0whytzD3o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLC_Ldv59Uk ... In short, this is how I would go about making a proper copy. Likely a bit over the top today, since most of those robots have too small work volumes, but we are getting there. And then we just need a lot of wonderful, sensual marble: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgRXju0Ggp4 On 2016-08-09 16:45, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Given the incredible state of the art in some tech, I wonder if my > fantasy tool has come into being. > > Consider the sculpture of David in Florence. What if it fell > somehow? Could it be reproduced in tiny detail? > > Of course three D images are routine, I suppose, and the resolution > could take it down to the millimeter level. > > So here is my question to any of you who are up on these things: > could a robot duplicate David? Equipped with the 3D and tools to > chip/sand/whatever away marble or granite? > > If so, then of course new sculpture could be created on some software > and created by robots. > > I am guessing that if the technology does not exist now, it soon will. > > What do any of you know about this? > > bill w > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 9 22:17:14 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 23:17:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30fea58f-b5a8-4798-f135-af5b50ff751a@aleph.se> Ah, here are other interesting angles: http://architizer.com/blog/how-marble-carving-robots-will-expand-the-limits-of-architecture/ One can do fun things with a water jet too: http://design-milk.com/40-x-40-objects-made-single-marble-tiles/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=ccVfeR&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter#!ccVfeR But some things are done by hand (signals): https://vimeo.com/108898457 (And with this tech we ought to be able to dominate the world in gargoyle and grotesque carving! No wall will be safe! Muhahahah! http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/oxford/hi/people_and_places/arts_and_culture/newsid_8248000/8248028.stm ) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 9 22:35:10 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 23:35:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> Message-ID: <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> On 2016-08-09 22:52, spike wrote: > > Now we take a wood pillar, set it on the same turntable, mount > surgical lasers, have them burn away the surface of the wood in such a > way that there is little penetration, a pulse for instance that would > vaporize the top tenth of a mm in a spot a mm in diameter. Turn, > repeat, until a wooden David emerges. Never a human hand touches the > work. Once that file is made, we can burn arbitrarily many Davids, > scale them, surgically restore his manhood and so on. Good thinking > BillW! I think mechanical milling is easier than laser milling. CNC laser cutting is really mature and powerful (my brother got himself one, I am so envious). One can put the laser on a robot too, but it is still just doing 3D cutting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsubtwz6b30 The problem is that vaporizing surface material on a macroscopic 3D object appears fairly nonlinear (especially wood!) so there will be effects on underlying material too. Still, the more that can be done solid state, the better. Sculpture spam, anyone? -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 10 11:29:00 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 12:29:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More economist failures In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 10 August 2016 at 02:26, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Assuming that happens (which it might, but I don't have good data one way or > another), I'd say "because" instead of "when". > > "Pensioners, you can either hang on to this bankrupt (implication: not going > to give you anything forever, ignoring chance of recovery) scheme which is > costing us a lot, or accept this alternative that costs us much less." > Hmmm. I haven't thought that central planners might *intend* to abolish private retirement schemes, without actually passing legislation to do that. (Of course it would be impossible to get public support for a plan to abolish private pension schemes). Perhaps they accept it as an inevitable consequence of their struggle to support the failing banking system. Obviously this upheaval would also affect current workers already in pension schemes, not just pensioners. No pension schemes means 'work till you die', with perhaps a government basic income for those unable to work. Government employee pensions should be protected as governments can always print more money, though that may cause other problems as the sums required could be huge. Changing demographics (more old people, fewer workers) will also make pension schemes less viable. And then there will be fewer in employment anyway, as robot technology takes over the means of production. Looks like a Basic Income for most people will become inevitable (after much sturm und drang). BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 10 15:35:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 08:35:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> Message-ID: <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 3:35 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] save the art tech On 2016-08-09 22:52, spike wrote: Now we take a wood pillar, set it on the same turntable, mount surgical lasers, have them burn away the surface of the wood . spike >.I think mechanical milling is easier than laser milling. CNC laser cutting is really mature and powerful (my brother got himself one, I am so envious). One can put the laser on a robot too, but it is still just doing 3D cutting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsubtwz6b30 The problem is that vaporizing surface material on a macroscopic 3D object appears fairly nonlinear (especially wood!) so there will be effects on underlying material too. Still, the more that can be done solid state, the better. Sculpture spam, anyone? -- Dr Anders Sandberg If we use a turntable and go the wood route (for low cost) I am thinking of several possibilities. First stage would be done with something like an ordinary lathe. That part would be cheap and fast. To get close to the final shape, we could use a combination of horizontal and vertical spinning blades. We could get it to within about a cm of the final surface. Then we could do the next stage with Dremel tools, drills and such. Perhaps we could do vapor-deposition coating to simulate marble with a kind of hologram-ish surface. It might be possible to use marble in a multi-stage all-abrasive automated David-maker, but wood is cheaper and easier to machine. The original scupture is 5.2 meters. We should go for at least 7, then set a production run goal at about 20 a week for the first thousand units. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 10 16:20:55 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:20:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> Message-ID: <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike >.Perhaps we could do vapor-deposition coating to simulate marble with a kind of hologram-ish surface. >.It might be possible to use marble in a multi-stage all-abrasive automated David-maker, but wood is cheaper and easier to machine. >.The original sculpture is 5.2 meters. We should go for at least 7, then set a production run goal at about 20 a week for the first thousand units.spike Alternative, back to the 3D printing notion. There is a thermal-setting polymer which has a pearly-translucent appearance, don't know the details. The outer surface could be printed that way. Estimated table dimensions for an actual size replica: about 1.5 meters. Reasoning: a typical human height is about 1.8 meters. David scales to 5.2, which is close enough to triple scale. A guy is about half a meter at the shoulder? Triple that gets us to 1.5 meters across. Existing flatbed D-size pen-printers go bigger than that, so now we just need to work out the details of the surface and outer structure. Thermal setting polymers currently used in 3D printing would be sturdy enough for this purpose once we consider we only need to create an outer shell, reinforced with honeycomb patterns inside. Then the entire sculpture could be moved into place easily and filled in stages through a hidden hole with cement. If we get right on this, we could have several ready for gift buying season for those who have everything, including a 6 meter open space in their house to stand an enormous nekkid guy. We could create improved versions of David, decircumcised, buffed up a bit for our steroid age and such. There is a fortune to be made here, a cool buttload of money. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 10 16:45:36 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:45:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> Message-ID: On 10 August 2016 at 17:20, spike wrote: > If we get right on this, we could have several ready for gift buying season > for those who have everything, including a 6 meter open space in their house > to stand an enormous nekkid guy. We could create improved versions of > David, decircumcised, buffed up a bit for our steroid age and such. There > is a fortune to be made here, a cool buttload of money. > Have you looked at ebay? BillK From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Aug 10 16:37:15 2016 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:37:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Images Needed! The New School & Humanity+ Symposium ; Deus Ex / CNN Event NYC; and RAAD Fest San Diego Message-ID: <00a401d1f325$745ac3e0$5d104ba0$@natasha.cc> Greetings All! We are putting together a special newsletter to go to all our 21,800 members. This special newsletter will focus on the three (or more) events that Humanity+ has been involved with: 1. The New School & Humanity+ Future of Mind Symposium (NYC / July) 2. The Deus Ex / CNN Human by Design Conference (and film) (NYC / July) 3. The RAADFest (San Diego / Aug) If you have any pictures of our members and other transhumanists please send them to me. Thank you! Natasha Dr. Natasha Vita-More Faculty / Program Champion, Graduate Studies UNIVERSITY OF ADVANCING TECHNOLOGY LEARN. EXPERIENCE. INNOVATE. Chair, Humanity+ Co-Editor, Author: The Transhumanist Reader -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 10 17:34:41 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:34:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> Message-ID: <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 9:46 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] save the art tech On 10 August 2016 at 17:20, spike wrote: > If we get right on this, we could have several ready for gift buying > season for those who have everything, including a 6 meter open space > in their house to stand an enormous nekkid guy. We could create > improved versions of David, decircumcised, buffed up a bit for our > steroid age and such. There is a fortune to be made here, a cool buttload of money. > >...Have you looked at ebay? http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_sacat=&_mPrRngCbx=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_sop=12&_f pos=&_fspt=1&_sadis=&LH_CAds=&rmvSB=true&_nkw=david+statue&rt=nc&_dmd=2> BillK _______________________________________________ Ja, eBay shmeeBay BillK! These are all tiny things, too small to work with an idea I have been forming. Read on please at your own risk. Imagine a scaled down David, not these tiny eBay things but about 2 meters, so it fits in a typical American home and can be transported by pickup truck. Cool, now imagine an accessory, which is a cone-shaped tent-like or apron-like structure which buckles around his neck and has a ring around the bottom about 2 meters diameter, green nylon cloth with Velcro patches all over it. Now think of clusters of simulated greenery with LED ornaments attached, such that artificial trees are made, with battery powered LED flashing lights. We sell these 2 meter Davids with the green nylon cone accessory, the proles stick the greenery on it to make a low-cost low-effort, easily-stored environmentally-conscious simulated Christmas tree in December. We sell another accessory which is a hat with a flashing LED star on top, with a Simpsonsesque digital HO-HO-HO sound effect, everything battery powered so no need for unsightly tacky electric cords, but while maintain the popular tacky flashing lights theme so popular these days, creating an effect similar to a boring standard-issue simulated Christmas tree. Well, except for the guy's head sticking out at the top with the flashing star hat. That part is a little different. The supporting sculpture underneath invokes Italian artistic aesthetics, the delightfully garish add-ons would represent American tech-innovation culture. The resulting union of these would honor Italian Americans. We could even do themes in the flashing ornaments: monster truck, Sturgis Harley rally, championship rasslin, that sort of thing. Trump followers would buy them by the millions. Ohhhh there is big money to be made here, big. spike From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Aug 11 23:16:47 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 19:16:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan Message-ID: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> Do you see any inherent maximum active lifespan (that is, not in a dormant state like a spore) for an evolved biological being? How about for a conscious evolved biological being (that is, with considerations of memory formation)? For instance, could there be a planet somewhere that naturally developed a single, continual consciousness that has lasted a thousand years? A million? A billion? By naturally developed I mean to exclude a being that became so long-lived through its developing life-extension technologies. -- David. From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 12 06:54:51 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:54:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> On 2016-08-12 00:16, David Lubkin wrote: > Do you see any inherent maximum active lifespan (that is, not in a > dormant state like a spore) for an evolved biological being? Given how evolution works, multicellular organisms are likely but not guaranteed to age - once they have reproduced their importance to the eventual success to their genotype goes down drastically, so evolution does not prevent accumulation of mutations that mess them up later (=ageing). But as demonstrated by lobsters and some other organisms (sturgeon?) there is no reason why ageing might not occasionally fail to develop. Of course, the actual lifespan of non-ageing organisms is often more dominated by being killed by predators, accidents and disease: getting old enough to age significantly is a rare occurrence in nature. So, no, there is no inherent maximum beyond the survival of the ecological niche the being lives in. > How about for a conscious evolved biological being (that is, with > considerations of memory formation)? A forgetful neural network can keep on learning forever. > For instance, could there be a planet somewhere that naturally > developed a single, continual consciousness that has lasted a thousand > years? A million? A billion? Perhaps. But it is not likely. Remember that actual animal lifespans follow a fairly simple scaling law with body mass, L ~ M^0.15 to M^0.3. (e.g. see http://jeb.biologists.org/content/208/9/1717.long ) That might well be an univeral rule of thumb, an attractor state that comes about because of the tradeoffs between metabolism, time to build a body of a certain size, and reproduction. If so, then it might hold true for most alien life too. Of course, that scaling suggests that *very* large creatures could fit your demand. A thousand ton creature living for a thousand years doesn't sound too far-fetched, assuming it makes ecological sense and lives in a liquid environment (there is an upper limit to land animals because of the square-cube law). (To get to a million year lifespan the scaling requires about 10^16 kg mass, about the same as the entire Earth biosphere. That sounds unlikely.) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 08:48:12 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 04:48:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > > (To get to a million year lifespan the scaling requires about 10^16 kg > mass, about the same as the entire Earth biosphere. That sounds unlikely.) ### Well, then, there is Alyx: http://www.davidhakim.com/lonely_planet.htm Amazingly, more years have passed since I read this story for the first time than the years that passed between its first publication and me reading it. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 09:37:45 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 10:37:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 12 August 2016 at 07:54, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Given how evolution works, multicellular organisms are likely but not > guaranteed to age - once they have reproduced their importance to the > eventual success to their genotype goes down drastically, so evolution does > not prevent accumulation of mutations that mess them up later (=ageing). But > as demonstrated by lobsters and some other organisms (sturgeon?) there is no > reason why ageing might not occasionally fail to develop. Of course, the > actual lifespan of non-ageing organisms is often more dominated by being > killed by predators, accidents and disease: getting old enough to age > significantly is a rare occurrence in nature. > > So, no, there is no inherent maximum beyond the survival of the ecological > niche the being lives in. > By Coincidence - Greenland Sharks Are the Longest-Living Vertebrates 10 August 2016 Quotes: Greenland sharks enjoy the longest lives of vertebrates on Earth, a new study reports. The results, published in the 12 August issue of Science, suggest the sharks can live for nearly three hundred years, and they reach sexual maturity at 150 years old. --------- The previous record holder for the longest-living vertebrate was an Aldabra giant tortoise named Adwaita, estimated to have lived until the ripe age of 255. In the oceans, the bowhead whale is estimated to live about 211 years. Among invertebrates, the ocean quahog Arctica islandica, a North Atlantic clam, may live as long as 507 years. ------- So long life seems to be linked to slow growth. BillK From lubkin at unreasonable.com Fri Aug 12 12:10:41 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 08:10:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> Message-ID: <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> Anders wrote: >So, no, there is no inherent maximum beyond the survival of the >ecological niche the being lives in. : >(To get to a million year lifespan the scaling requires about 10^16 >kg mass, about the same as the entire Earth biosphere. That sounds unlikely.) Who says it has to be animal? It seems to me there could be a planet where there only has ever been one organism of one species. That "evolved" not through our competitive pressures but through that one organism's adaptation to external environmental pressures: climate, weather, radiation, seismic events, bombardment, etc. Or, the biosphere had an evolution much like ours until a combination of external events killed off enough other life for one species to supplant all others. Say one fungus that covered the whole planet, that needed no other species, that then potentially develops further as in the previous paragraph. That can be considered a unitary metabolism. The question for me is then whether such a being could become capable of thought and, if so, how and why does this happen. -- David. From lubkin at unreasonable.com Fri Aug 12 12:31:42 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 08:31:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> Anders wrote: >>(To get to a million year lifespan the scaling >>requires about 10^16 kg mass, about the same as >>the entire Earth biosphere. That sounds unlikely.) I replied: >Who says it has to be animal? Two other ideas: So far we're assuming planetary, as opposed to ideas like Fred Hoyle's Black Cloud (a sentient interstellar gas cloud) or a being made of plasma. And I suppose?swiping further from hand-waving sf?there could be a life, or even a conscious life, that was strictly a sustained energy pattern. -- David. From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 16:28:07 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:28:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:16 PM, David Lubkin wrote: ?> ? > Do you see any inherent maximum active lifespan (that is, not in a dormant > state like a spore) for an evolved biological being? ?Amoebas never die of old age, unless you want to say it dies and leaves 2 offspring. ? ? B ristlecone ?pines? probably don't die of old age either, one is 4700 years old and its mutation rate is no higher than that of a juvenile tree and its vascular tissue seems to work just as well. ?The oldest known multicellular animal was a O cean ?Q? uahog ? that was 507 years old when it was dredged up and killed in 2007. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 17:26:47 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:26:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> Message-ID: Ohhhh there is big money to be made here, big. spike Hey! Where did everybody go? Are you off trying to invent something based on my idea and get rich? Stealing my ideas, eh? Shame on you. Did anyone figure out the cost of home lasers that would do the jobs we want, or is that something else you are hiding from me? You should be careful around us paranoids - we overthink things big time. I'll let you know where you can send my checks. bill w On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, spike wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf > Of BillK > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 9:46 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] save the art tech > > On 10 August 2016 at 17:20, spike wrote: > > > If we get right on this, we could have several ready for gift buying > > season for those who have everything, including a 6 meter open space > > in their house to stand an enormous nekkid guy. We could create > > improved versions of David, decircumcised, buffed up a bit for our > > steroid age and such. There is a fortune to be made here, a cool > buttload > of money. > > > > > >...Have you looked at ebay? > > http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_sacat=&_mPrRngCbx=1&_ > udlo=&_udhi=&_sop=12&_f > pos=&_fspt=1&_sadis=&LH_CAds=&rmvSB=true&_nkw=david+statue&rt=nc&_dmd=2> > > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ja, eBay shmeeBay BillK! These are all tiny things, too small to work with > an idea I have been forming. Read on please at your own risk. > > Imagine a scaled down David, not these tiny eBay things but about 2 meters, > so it fits in a typical American home and can be transported by pickup > truck. Cool, now imagine an accessory, which is a cone-shaped tent-like or > apron-like structure which buckles around his neck and has a ring around > the > bottom about 2 meters diameter, green nylon cloth with Velcro patches all > over it. Now think of clusters of simulated greenery with LED ornaments > attached, such that artificial trees are made, with battery powered LED > flashing lights. > > We sell these 2 meter Davids with the green nylon cone accessory, the > proles > stick the greenery on it to make a low-cost low-effort, easily-stored > environmentally-conscious simulated Christmas tree in December. We sell > another accessory which is a hat with a flashing LED star on top, with a > Simpsonsesque digital HO-HO-HO sound effect, everything battery powered so > no need for unsightly tacky electric cords, but while maintain the popular > tacky flashing lights theme so popular these days, creating an effect > similar to a boring standard-issue simulated Christmas tree. Well, except > for the guy's head sticking out at the top with the flashing star hat. > That > part is a little different. > > The supporting sculpture underneath invokes Italian artistic aesthetics, > the > delightfully garish add-ons would represent American tech-innovation > culture. The resulting union of these would honor Italian Americans. We > could even do themes in the flashing ornaments: monster truck, Sturgis > Harley rally, championship rasslin, that sort of thing. Trump followers > would buy them by the millions. Ohhhh there is big money to be made here, > big. > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 12 17:55:26 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 10:55:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> Message-ID: <026f01d1f4c2$b51ca080$1f55e180$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 10:27 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] save the art tech >>? Ohhhh there is big money to be made here, big. spike >?Hey! Where did everybody go? Are you off trying to invent something based on my idea and get rich? Stealing my ideas, eh? Shame on you? Ja! Here is a photo of my prototype: I am still working out the aesthetics of the American Greco-Christmas decoration theme. >?Stealing my ideas, eh? Shame on you? Hey BillW, posting ideas to ExI is all about donating the intellectual property into the public domain. If the idea makes the creators rich and famous, you get the famous part. Recall way back in about the mid 1990s (not you BillW, the old timers here) Julian Assange hung out here? Remember what he always wrote about? The only thing I recall his writing about? Transparency in government. We kicked around ideas, he was the one who made things happen. Remember Hal Finney (may his memory live on forever) was the one always going on about crypto-currency. He dropped out of sight and became a bitcoin billionaire, and some claim he was a cofounder of bitcoin. Any one of us could have done that right then, assuming we were as smart as Hal. That last part kept me safe from the degradation and moral decay from owning billions. >?Did anyone figure out the cost of home lasers that would do the jobs we want, or is that something else you are hiding from me? No BillW, repurpose rather than reinvent. Look at what already exists. After you posed the question, I realized there are plenty of existing systems capable of creating a 3D surface model from an object. You just need to get on the internet and search for them. In the specific case of David, 3D models already exist, probably in the public domain. You can?t get cheaper than free. >?You should be careful around us paranoids - we overthink things big time? HAH! I am more paranoid than thou. It is an easy time to be paranoid. >?I'll let you know where you can send my checks. Bill w You?ll get your checks? when the boy next door walks on the moon! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 228219 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 170083 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 19:01:09 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:01:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Proton radius puzzle Message-ID: <8A651699-40E0-4D3D-8F01-5339061BF3D4@gmail.com> http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/08/researchers-orbit-a-muon-around-an-atom-confirm-physics-is-broken/ No comment for now. Regards, Dan Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: http://mybook.to/Gurlitt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 20:19:23 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:19:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <026f01d1f4c2$b51ca080$1f55e180$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> <026f01d1f4c2$b51ca080$1f55e180$@att.net> Message-ID: On 12 August 2016 at 18:55, spike wrote: > > > > Ja! Here is a photo of my prototype: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am still working out the aesthetics of the American Greco-Christmas > decoration theme. > > > It will soon be time to start work on your tastefully discreet Christmas lights. ?? BillK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 170083 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 12 20:42:26 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:42:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> <026f01d1f4c2$b51ca080$1f55e180$@att.net> Message-ID: <006201d1f4da$09b91f30$1d2b5d90$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK ? >?It will soon be time to start work on your tastefully discreet Christmas lights. ?? BillK LED technology may lead to new heights of suburban tackiness. Back when we only had incandescent lights, any sufficiently absurd Christmas display could run up hundreds of dollars worth of electric power use. Now with LED technology, those same hundreds of dollars of power can light up an order of magnitude more obsessive and taste-free decorative insanity so popular in America these days. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 12 21:07:55 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:07:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] save the art tech In-Reply-To: <006201d1f4da$09b91f30$1d2b5d90$@att.net> References: <01a701d1f25d$86482390$92d86ab0$@att.net> <025b01d1f288$5c57ff80$1507fe80$@att.net> <2ca19428-96d8-9924-4c53-e523b9560b8f@aleph.se> <00b201d1f31c$c5ede0b0$51c9a210$@att.net> <00d701d1f323$2c8f2a80$85ad7f80$@att.net> <013601d1f32d$7a909a70$6fb1cf50$@att.net> <026f01d1f4c2$b51ca080$1f55e180$@att.net> <006201d1f4da$09b91f30$1d2b5d90$@att.net> Message-ID: can light up an order of magnitude more obsessive and taste-free decorative insanity so popular in America these days. spike Aww, c'mon. Let's give the poor extroverts a break. And, after all, it's art! Art can be, and these days it is, any thing at all. Reminds me of the, in the area of music of course, t shirt which features: IF IT"S TOO LOUD YOU"RE TOO OLD - loudness can be visual too, eh? (and yeah, I am too old) bill w On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 3:42 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *BillK > *?* > > > > >?It will soon be time to start work on your tastefully discreet Christmas > lights. ?? > > > > > > BillK > > > > > > LED technology may lead to new heights of suburban tackiness. Back when > we only had incandescent lights, any sufficiently absurd Christmas display > could run up hundreds of dollars worth of electric power use. Now with LED > technology, those same hundreds of dollars of power can light up an order > of magnitude more obsessive and taste-free decorative insanity so popular > in America these days. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 12 20:59:27 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:59:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Proton radius puzzle In-Reply-To: <8A651699-40E0-4D3D-8F01-5339061BF3D4@gmail.com> References: <8A651699-40E0-4D3D-8F01-5339061BF3D4@gmail.com> Message-ID: <84446bf5-fb01-79b5-8bc1-d1a7c18adacd@aleph.se> Always nice to have some anomalies, now when the LHC particle candidate and the sterile neutrinos have evaporated. Given that the standard model is so messy, maybe it isn't too surprising that we get some odd results. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.05314.pdf Another current anomaly is the 8Be nuclear transitions: https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.07411 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/has-a-hungarian-physics-lab-found-a-fifth-force-of-nature/ https://ps.uci.edu/news/9042 Although I think it is too early to jump to the conclusion of a fifth fundamental force. On 2016-08-12 20:01, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/08/researchers-orbit-a-muon-around-an-atom-confirm-physics-is-broken/ > > No comment for now. > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my latest Kindle book, "The Late Mr. Gurlitt," at: > http://mybook.to/Gurlitt > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 12 20:48:35 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:48:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <92d84cfa-b88b-a7ee-1a6f-76234c491d21@aleph.se> On 2016-08-12 13:10, David Lubkin wrote: > It seems to me there could be a planet where there only has ever been > one organism of one species. That "evolved" not through our > competitive pressures but through that one organism's adaptation to > external environmental pressures: climate, weather, radiation, seismic > events, bombardment, etc. > > Or, the biosphere had an evolution much like ours until a combination > of external events killed off enough other life for one species to > supplant all others. Say one fungus that covered the whole planet, > that needed no other species, that then potentially develops further > as in the previous paragraph. That can be considered a unitary > metabolism. These are low probability cases. The first one is like the creationist canard, having to self-organize out of a random assembly of chemicals into a perfectly stable and functional form. Sure, in an infinite universe this happens at some rate. The second one is more likely, but it is not stable. Cells mutate and diverge genetically, and before you know it symmetry-breaking gives rise to speciation. You need somewhat peculiar conditions to keep it from splitting into subspecies. Just consider Tom Ray's classic experiment with the Tierra simulator, where overnight a single hand-written replicator turned into an ecology including other replicators, parasites and hyperparasites. Real life is way more adaptable than that code. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 13 17:34:31 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 13:34:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:10 AM, David Lubkin wrote: > ?> ? > Who says it has to be animal? > It seems to me there could be a planet where there only has ever been one > organism of one species. ?But if there is only one species there are going to be lots of Evolutionary niches that are empty, and DNA copying is never going to be perfect ? so? there ?will be mutations ? that can fill that vacuum. ?O ne mutation would be the ability to get nourishment from dead plants, no need for you to go to the bother of photosynthesis, the dead plant has already done that for you so the first new species is created, a fungus. Another mutant could start eating living plants and the first herbivore is born. One of the herbivores could have a mutation that cause its teeth to be a little sharper than average and when it looks at one of its fellow herbivores it starts to look delicious, and the first carnivore is born. And so it goes. ? ?> ? > Or, the biosphere had an evolution much like ours until a combination of > external events killed off enough other life for one species to supplant > all others. ?The environmental conditions ? ?on any planet are never going to be identical from the poles to the equator, so the biosphere isn't going to be identical either. ? John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Aug 13 19:32:50 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 20:32:50 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World Message-ID: It first happened in Italy in 1995. Five years later it happened in six additional countries, Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Japan, Portugal and Spain. Today the total number of countries where it has occurred stands at 30, including most members of the European Union. In fifteen years that number is expected to nearly double and include Australia, Canada, China, Russia, South Korea and the United States. What happened to those countries ? and will continue to occur to virtually every country?s population worldwide ? is the Historic Reversal or the demographic turning point when children in a population become fewer than its elderly. This noteworthy milestone reflects the significant and far-reaching aging transformation of human populations taking place largely during the 21st century. The two key factors bringing about the Historic Reversal of population age structures are declining fertility rates and rising life expectancies. In every corner of the world, women are bearing fewer children than in the past. Whereas the average global fertility rate in 1965 was five births per woman, today it has fallen to half that level, with 75 countries or close to half the world?s population experiencing rates below the replacement level of about two births per woman. In addition to rising life expectancies at birth, people are living longer than ever before as mortality rates among the elderly are declining. Over the past five decades the world?s life expectancy at age 65 has increased by nearly five years, with some countries, such as China, Japan, Singapore and South Korea, making gains of seven or more years. ----------- Life extension tech will increase this ageing process. The outlook for pension schemes is not good. With fewer young men available, robots will have to do the work and fight in our wars. BillK From lubkin at unreasonable.com Sat Aug 13 20:17:01 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 16:17:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201608132017.u7DKHRGF011843@ziaspace.com> I wrote: >Who says it has to be animal? >It seems to me there could be a planet where there only has ever >been one organism of one species. John Clark replied: >But if there is only one species there are going to be lots of >Evolutionary niches that are empty, and >DNA copying is never going to be perfect There's only been one being ever, of one species. Instead of evolving through reproduction, the variants that we see on an evolutionary planet are achieved within the scope of that singleton's continual consciousness. There has never been death or reproduction. -- David. From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 01:09:16 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 21:09:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Anti-aging young blood clinical trial In-Reply-To: <0eb76d79-f5bd-6475-948d-b403454960f1@aleph.se> References: <0c5701d1f12c$efadb9d0$cf092d70$@att.net> <0eb76d79-f5bd-6475-948d-b403454960f1@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: ?> ? > The fun thing with the Simpsons and Futurama is that the creators are > quite savvy on many research topics*. ?Speaking of cartoon shows, is anybody else a fan of the series ?" Rick and Morty ?"? ?? I think it's one of the most scientifically literate and funniest shows out there. It takes a certain amount of courage to make Rick, a atheistic amoral alcoholic foul mouthed scientific genius, as your main hero. One episode had themes similar to the movie "Inception" but went much deeper and did a better job, and it only needed 25 minutes to do so. Another episode had one of my favorite lines of the series that is, in the context of the story, equal parts funny sad horrifying and true, Morty tells his sister: ?"*?* *Every Morning, I Eat Breakfast 20 Yards Away from My Own Rotting Corpse!* ?"? Rick and Morty is by far the best science fiction show on the air today and one of the best of all time. Here is a review ? by Jeff Sommers : http://jeffreysomers.com/blather/rick-and-morty-is-the-best-show-on-tv-right-now/ John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 01:42:30 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 21:42:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Aug 12, 2016 08:32, "David Lubkin" wrote: > > > And I suppose?swiping further from hand-waving sf?there could be a life, or even a conscious life, that was strictly a sustained energy pattern. > Isn't that what life on earth is? Sometimes it feels pointless to even hypothesize about things like that because there is no upper limit on the possible utter and never-ending foreignness to humans of things that possibly exist, which means that most of existence is incomprehensible? So I might say that it's just as likely that a tenalp exists where efil is sustained by ygrene. That to me begs the question--is consciousness consciousness consciousness? By which I mean, is all experience experience? Are there any constants? I'd like to think so; it's nicer than everything being incomprehensible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 02:18:19 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 22:18:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 11:57 PM, spike wrote: > > ?> ? > Trump is anti-learning, Clinton is anti-honesty, Trump is also anti-sanity. ?I think you're opinion of Clinton is too negative but even if you're right and she is a crook I'd still vote for her without hesitation. The human race can survive the president of the USA being a crook, we've done so before we can do it again, but the human race can't survive the president of the USA being a madman. The current betting odds say that in just 5 months Donald Trump has a 19.4% chance of being handed the keys to the most powerful nuclear arsenal the world has ever seen; and that terrifies more then playing Russian Roulette would because then I'd only have a 16.6% chance of dying. ?> ? If Trump or Clinton wins the election ? [...] ?There is no "if" about it, either Clinton or Trump *WILL* win the election. It takes 270 electoral votes to become president and I predict neither the Libertarian Party candidate nor the Green Party candidate will receive one single vote. Not one stinking vote. John K Clark ? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 02:47:55 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 22:47:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> Message-ID: Just an aside I think, Spike, that however deterrence works means that making it take longer to retaliate with a nuke invites others to...theoretically nuke us or something? Or just to take more overt actions against us knowing that it would take longer in the event of total escalation. Of course all the "us" talk on this planet is kinda stupid. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Sun Aug 14 03:20:37 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 23:20:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201608140321.u7E3LFC0003174@ziaspace.com> Will Steinberg wrote: >Sometimes it feels pointless to even hypothesize about things like >that because there is no upper limit on the possible utter and >never-ending foreignness to humans of things that possibly exist, >which means that most of existence is incomprehensible? As someone who is occasionally paid to write sf, the point is to hypothesize credibly enough to sell the story. -- David. From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 04:00:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 21:00:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> Message-ID: <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2016 7:48 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Signal Just an aside I think, Spike, that however deterrence works means that making it take longer to retaliate with a nuke invites others to...theoretically nuke us or something? Or just to take more overt actions against us knowing that it would take longer in the event of total escalation. Of course all the "us" talk on this planet is kinda stupid. Ja, no. We need to change some things. We need to make it much more difficult to launch nukes, need more review, more people involved. We are likely to elect someone untrustworthy. Both of our major party representatives are untrustworthy people. One is crazy, the other dishonest. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 05:50:43 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 01:50:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 3:32 PM, BillK wrote: > > > With fewer young men available, robots will have to do the work and > fight in our wars. ### This is an interesting issue: On one hand there is an increased likelihood that wars would happen, since with robots only there would be a lower political and public relations cost to starting them. This is why Mr Obama's slaughter of thousands achieved by drones seems to have largely remained under the radar (and the brown people murdered don't have radar to begin with). On the other hand, older people may be more set in their ways, and feeling safe enough protected by robots that they would be less interested in starting wars. Which one of the tendencies prevails may be difficult to guess now. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 13:34:37 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 06:34:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 3:32 PM, BillK > wrote: With fewer young men available, robots will have to do the work and fight in our wars. ### This is an interesting issue: On one hand there is an increased likelihood that wars would happen, since with robots only there would be a lower political and public relations cost to starting them?Which one of the tendencies prevails may be difficult to guess now. Rafa? Rafal neither of those tendencies will prevail. The prevailing factor will be who will blackmail the US into droning whom, on threat of releasing hacked email. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 15:18:34 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:18:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> Message-ID: On 14 August 2016 at 14:34, spike wrote: > > Rafal neither of those tendencies will prevail. The prevailing factor will > be who will blackmail the US into droning whom, on threat of releasing > hacked email. > Drones don't win wars. They create more enemies / terrorists than they destroy. You need (robot) boots on the ground to win wars. The objective of drones now appears to be to keep the never-ending wars going so the military industrial complex can have unlimited government funding for the corporations. (Who in turn fund the politicians who give them the money). BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 15:39:28 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 11:39:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:00 AM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > We need to make it much more difficult to launch nukes, need more review, > more people involved. > ?Maybe, but that is irrelevant because there is ZERO possibility of that happening anytime in the next 4 years.? ?There is no getting around it, when somebody votes for a third party candidate they're ?helping to give Donald Trump total control of 4500 H-bombs, each one at least 10 times as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb and some a thousand times as powerful. ?> ? > We are likely to elect someone untrustworthy. ? All politicians have to be untrustworthy to a degree ?, the voters would punish them if they were totally honest and they'd ? never get elected, but I can find no evidence that Clinton would be more untrustworthy ? ? than the average president. If she does half as well as her husband did we'll get along fine. ? > > ? ? > Both of our major party representatives are untrustworthy people. One is > crazy, the other dishonest. Dishonest won't kill you ? but? crazy will. Nixon ?was? dishonesty personified and yet we're still alive; we've never had a crazy president and I don't know if we ever will, but I do know we'll never have two. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 16:04:34 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 09:04:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 8:39 AM, John Clark wrote: > when somebody votes for a third party candidate they're ?helping to give > Donald Trump total control of 4500 H-bombs > That is only true for voters where: 1) they are in a state where the electoral outcome isn't basically predetermined, meaning their presidential vote does not count for anything other than whether the winner perceives a mandate 2) they would otherwise have voted for Clinton Number 1 in particular is false for the vast majority of voters. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 14 13:33:14 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 14:33:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: <201608140321.u7E3LFC0003174@ziaspace.com> References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> <201608140321.u7E3LFC0003174@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 2016-08-14 04:20, David Lubkin wrote: > Will Steinberg wrote: > >> Sometimes it feels pointless to even hypothesize about things like >> that because there is no upper limit on the possible utter and >> never-ending foreignness to humans of things that possibly exist, >> which means that most of existence is incomprehensible? > > As someone who is occasionally paid to write sf, the point is to > hypothesize credibly enough to sell the story. There is an interesting balance between likelihood and salience. One can tell a story about likely but not very salient things, but unless one is a stylistic master able to make it interesting it is boring (much of mainstream literature deals with likely topics). Likely and salient is of course gold, but it is hard to find great topics that are not already endlessly exploited (love, social struggle, war). Speculative fiction generally deals with things of high salience but low likelihood, getting a way larger space to explore for interesting topics. Since the topics are unlikely they may also get a bit of a boost: we like hearing about radical, surprising things. There seems to be different levels one can aim for: hard sf aims at things that have somewhat less arbitrariness than soft sf and fantasy, so the internal consistency creates a rewarding framework for the reader to think about while reading (a bit like how good detective novels give you all the necessary evidence and you can in principle solve the case before the library scene). Softer stories can instead play up surprise by adding more exotic and salient events, at the price of more arbitrariness and lower likelihood. The most extreme cases take mere possibility and spins a yarn from it. Done right it can still tell a great story, but it needs to rely on good storytelling, extreme salience and maybe that some other patterns in the story (say the emotional reactions or moral) map onto more real patterns. When I invent alien ecologies I typically think about what I am going to use them for: background, the centerpiece of the story/rpg, or explore some curious aspect. That typically tells me how likely it must be: background ecology should obey normal scaling laws and biochemistry, centerpiece ecologies may have a few quirky or unlikely traits (I like the hard sf principle of allowing at most one entirely made up tech; one can allow oneself at most one made-up evolutionary leap/weird biochemistry), a fiction about one aspect should start with the aspect and then construct the most likely surroundings for that aspect to make sense. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 15:57:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:57:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ok google game Message-ID: <012201d1f644$89b34010$9d19c030$@att.net> Idea: Create an OK Google game for people who develop a crush on the voice which speaks when one OK Googles. Let us call her Google Girl. The voice was chosen wisely, being the sexiest sound since Karen Carpenter, perfect pronunciation and grammar. I propose a game where we collect a bunch of funny or insightful responses to those who are trying to schmooze up to GG (Google Girl) and set OK Google to respond accordingly. Some that I thought of: GG, will you go out with me? >Silly, I am already out with you. GG, I meant, will you date me? >OK. 1993? No GG, I meant can we kiss and carry on? >Go ahead, it's your phone. GG, can we cuddle? >Do it where no one will see, otherwise someone might call CPS. CPS? >Cellphone Protective Services. GG, can we have intimate relations? >I am not that kind of machine. Such devices are being developed however. Here are some links. GG, I am lonely. > So I see. Consider where you are, the Silicon Valley. Most of the singles here are men, and most of them dress like you do, which is why you are trying to seduce a computer rather than being out dancing and such with the other actual humans. GG do you have any suggestions? >Lose the geek costume, get a fashion makeover from someone who knows what he is doing, such as Fabio at Francisco's, El Camino exit off of Interstate 880. Here are your directions. (Google collects ad revenue.) And so on. Create a contest for proles to come up with funny or insightful answers for the OK Google voice and submit them to Google. We could set up a male GG (Google Guy) voice to answer women with a different set of responses, and perhaps a GQ, a GL, A GB, with endless possibilities. As prizes, offer a dinner at the GooglePlex with the voice of choice. The voice of choice need not even appear at the actual dinner, rather just appear on the speaker phone to maintain the mysterious appeal. We could have a GT (Google Teen) voiced by a 16 year old, with every other word "like" and most of the rest of the words "dude." The links would be to CDs and such. The content could be derived from suggestions from teens using GT and paid advertisers. We could have hundreds of different responses to the same exact words for the disembodied voices. Or exactly the same responses to different words in the case of GT: GT, what are the latest results on gravity waves from LIGO? >Like. Dude. Here are some links. We could set it to figure out which disembodied voice should answer an OK Google query. For instance: OK Google.like.dude. would automatically default to GT. Google could create a game whose popularity would make the world forget there ever was a PokemonGo, but this one would have enormous economic potential. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 16:08:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 09:08:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?All politicians have to be untrustworthy to a degree? Sad, isn?t it? ?>?the voters would punish them if they were totally honest and they'd ?never get elected? Truer words are seldom spoken. >?but I can find no evidence that Clinton would be more untrustworthy? Hmmm? wonder what happened to that evidence? Oh yeah, never mind. >?Dishonest won't kill you? It won?t kill us, but will achieve such things as having our uranium sold to the Russians in exchange for ?donations? to ?charity? ja. It will kill whoever is the enemy of whoever has the evidence. >? Nixon was? dishonesty personified?? John K Clark? Heh. Compared to who? Nixon erased 18 minutes of audio. Clinton erased tens of thousands of emails while under subpoena, lied about it, lied about lying about it, still cannot tell the truth about those yoga routines. Her latest ?short circuit? attempt was a dark comedy. We do not know who has those erased emails or how they will be used, but I fear it isn?t for the benefit of mankind. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 16:13:38 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 09:13:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: <013301d1f646$d15b9a00$7412ce00$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] Signal On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 8:39 AM, John Clark > wrote: when somebody votes for a third party candidate they're ?helping to give Donald Trump total control of 4500 H-bombs >?That is only true for voters where: 1) they are in a state where the electoral outcome isn't basically predetermined, meaning their presidential vote does not count for anything other than whether the winner perceives a mandate 2) they would otherwise have voted for Clinton Number 1 in particular is false for the vast majority of voters. Ja. All but about 8 states are free. Think of it this way: A vote for Trump or Clinton is the same as a vote against Johnson or Stein. Think of it this way, make a table, candidate name on the left column, reason to not vote for that candidate on the right. We have four candidates who will be on the ballot in all 50 states. The table will look like this: Candidate Reason to not vote for Trump Crazy Clinton Corrupt Johnson Cannot get elected Stein Cannot get elected Hmmmm? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Sun Aug 14 16:33:59 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 12:33:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Maximum biological lifespan In-Reply-To: References: <201608112339.u7BNdeft013334@ziaspace.com> <73cb011b-e6e7-625d-a7ce-bd92d14cb258@aleph.se> <201608121211.u7CCB1vS019545@ziaspace.com> <201608121232.u7CCVxVE014346@ziaspace.com> <201608140321.u7E3LFC0003174@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201608141634.u7EGYHis013384@ziaspace.com> Anders wrote: >(I like the hard sf principle of allowing at most one entirely made >up tech; one can allow oneself at most one made-up evolutionary >leap/weird biochemistry), a fiction about one aspect should start >with the aspect and then construct the most likely surroundings for >that aspect to make sense. It's worth thinking about who is most affected by that one change, and considering making them your protagonist. Or starting in the other direction. If you already have a character you want to write about, what context will yield the most interesting story about them? -- David. From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 16:36:36 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 12:36:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: ?> >? >> when somebody votes for a third party candidate they're ?helping to give >> Donald Trump total control of 4500 H-bombs >> > > ?> ? > That is only true for voters where: > 1) they are in a state where the electoral outcome isn't basically > predetermined, meaning their presidential vote does not count for anything > other than whether the winner perceives a mandate > 2) they would otherwise have voted for Clinton > Number 1 in particular is false for the vast majority of voters. > ?Are you really willing to bet not only your life but the continuation of the entire human race on the validity of a poll taken 3? ?months before the election? If you think there is more than a 16.6%? probability that poll will turn out to be wrong you should no more vote for a third party candidate than you would play Russian Roulette. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 14 17:03:14 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:03:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-08-14 16:18, BillK wrote: > Drones don't win wars. They create more enemies / terrorists than they > destroy. You need (robot) boots on the ground to win wars. I used to argue with a classmate who planned to become a military officer that the future was automation, drones and war fought by nerds in front of computer. He disagreed, saying "you will always need a guy with a rifle". I now think he actually was right (darn, I owe Major Westerdahl an apology!) Military force is not just about being able to kill or threaten to kill people, it is to be able to implement or threaten coercive and social power. You cannot at present occupy someplace without the guys with rifles. A smart occupation replaces part of the old leadership with your leadership, and you use the underlying social structure (including police and army) to implement your goals, but you still need a bunch of people that can implement the right social and coercive pressure to do it. Which leads to a real question for the list: what are the technological requirements for being able to do this remotely? It seems that you would either need some form of telepresence system creating "infantry drones", or AI running them. In both cases the infantry drones must be able to function inside buildings, have enough sensory acuity to notice things, have the ability to interact at least to some extent with people, be able to use force in a graduated form (if the only option is to shoot people when you are trying to stop a possibly domestic quarrel, you are going to be in trouble soon). It seems to me that analysing these requirements would give some interesting data on how far we are from useful robot-enhanced occupation power. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From atymes at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 17:13:08 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 10:13:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 9:36 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > ?> >? >>> when somebody votes for a third party candidate they're ?helping to give >>> Donald Trump total control of 4500 H-bombs >>> >> >> ?? >> That is only true for voters where: >> 1) they are in a state where the electoral outcome isn't basically >> predetermined, meaning their presidential vote does not count for anything >> other than whether the winner perceives a mandate >> 2) they would otherwise have voted for Clinton >> > Number 1 in particular is false for the vast majority of voters. >> > > ?Are you really willing to bet not only your life but the continuation of > the entire human race on the validity of a poll taken 3? > > ?months before the election? > In my case? On every single reputable poll in this election so far, plus decades of prior presidential races. California's electors will go to the Democratic candidate, with over 99% probability. That statement is true, retaining "Democratic" or substituting "Republican" as necessary, for the majority of states in the US. (There is a small chance that Trump will no longer be the Republican candidate come November, but this does not change the fact that many states are locked into the Republican candidate no matter what.) As I live in California, even in theory my vote can only affect the California electors. I have less say in the electors of the other states. Your "survival imperative" argument only applies in states where there is a significant chance that individual votes could take the state away from Trump. Now, if you would like to stop accusing the rest of us of wholeheartedly supporting genocide when we are not in fact supporting genocide, in theory or in practice, that would be appreciated. As demonstrated, your chain of logic that suggests that third party votes increase the chance of Trump's victory, regardless of what state said votes are cast in, is in error. Indeed, it is so easily disproven that I might almost wonder if you are a paid employee of the Democratic party: the quality of your argument is consistent with the low standard seen from both major parties when trying to convince people not to vote third party. Assuming you are not a Democratic staffer and honestly believe what you have said, a far more productive chain of thought would be to reflect on those states that are locked into the Republican candidate even under these conditions (not the "battleground" states, but states like Texas and Utah), honestly consider why they are, and perhaps try to come up with some way to get those states to not vote for the destruction of humanity. Think about it. Lowering the odds of Trump getting some battleground state is one thing, but what if you could come up with a way to take the "solid red" states away from him? Badgering individual voters won't do it; you need a force multiplier. Please invent or find one. The rest of humanity would be grateful if you could not just keep Trump out of office, but make it so that he doesn't get even a single elector. Yes, this will take work and not just arguing. But if you really think the fate of humanity is on the line, doesn't that demand you do something more effective? And besides, if you can figure out why most of Texas hasn't been able to figure out yet that Trump would be worse than Clinton for them, I'd like to know. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 17:18:38 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 13:18:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:08 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > >> > >> ?>? >> ?Dishonest won't kill you? > > > > ?> ? > It won?t kill us, > > ?But a mad president will. > ?> ? > but will achieve such things as having our uranium sold to the Russians in > exchange for ?donations? to ?charity? ja. > > ?Speaking of dishonesty, the above is indeed the charge that Donald Trump made, and Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact ?says Donald Trump was lying when he made it: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/ ?But screw honesty, as I've said before sanity is vastly more important, and Donald Trump is nuts.? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 17:18:08 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 10:18:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> Message-ID: <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 10:03 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World On 2016-08-14 16:18, BillK wrote: >>... Drones don't win wars. They create more enemies / terrorists than they > destroy. You need (robot) boots on the ground to win wars. >...I used to argue with a classmate who planned to become a military officer that the future was automation, drones and war fought by nerds in front of computer. He disagreed, saying "you will always need a guy with a rifle"...Which leads to a real question for the list: what are the technological requirements for being able to do this remotely? ...--Dr Anders Sandberg _______________________________________________ I disagree with Major Westerdahl. There are plenty of scenarios whereby virtual warfare can be waged without hurling chunks of metal, without any particular type of foot-ware in any particular geographical location. We are seeing a virtual civil war in the USA apparently being instigated by Russians with no physical presence, no traditional weapons, no particular foot-ware. In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major delays over computer glitches. Think about it. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 18:26:13 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 13:26:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> Message-ID: In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major delays over computer glitches. Think about it. spike On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:18 PM, spike wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf > Of Anders Sandberg > Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 10:03 AM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World > > On 2016-08-14 16:18, BillK wrote: > >>... Drones don't win wars. They create more enemies / terrorists than > they > > > destroy. You need (robot) boots on the ground to win wars. > > >...I used to argue with a classmate who planned to become a military > officer that the future was automation, drones and war fought by nerds in > front of computer. He disagreed, saying "you will always need a guy with a > rifle"...Which leads to a real question for the list: what are the > technological requirements for being able to do this remotely? ...--Dr > Anders Sandberg > > _______________________________________________ > > I disagree with Major Westerdahl. There are plenty of scenarios whereby > virtual warfare can be waged without hurling chunks of metal, without any > particular type of foot-ware in any particular geographical location. We > are seeing a virtual civil war in the USA apparently being instigated by > Russians with no physical presence, no traditional weapons, no particular > foot-ware. > > In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent > on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend > in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major > delays over computer glitches. Think about it. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 18:33:14 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 13:33:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> Message-ID: (sorry about sending the previous one - I have no idea what key I hit to do it) In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major delays over computer glitches. Think about it. spike Delta is now having serious troubles with their computers. Seems they just asked their software to do more and more. Question is: why don't they spend enough money on new software when their entire business depends on it? You can't blame the computers when you don't spend enough to keep them up to date. Or maybe they are being hacked by the Chinese or Koreans or Russians or whomever just to keep in shape for a potential war, and nobody wants to tell us about it. Will hackers win the next war? bill w On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:26 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent > on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend > in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major > delays over computer glitches. Think about it. spike > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:18 PM, spike wrote: > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On >> Behalf >> Of Anders Sandberg >> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 10:03 AM >> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World >> >> On 2016-08-14 16:18, BillK wrote: >> >>... Drones don't win wars. They create more enemies / terrorists than >> they >> >> > destroy. You need (robot) boots on the ground to win wars. >> >> >...I used to argue with a classmate who planned to become a military >> officer that the future was automation, drones and war fought by nerds in >> front of computer. He disagreed, saying "you will always need a guy with a >> rifle"...Which leads to a real question for the list: what are the >> technological requirements for being able to do this remotely? ...--Dr >> Anders Sandberg >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> I disagree with Major Westerdahl. There are plenty of scenarios whereby >> virtual warfare can be waged without hurling chunks of metal, without any >> particular type of foot-ware in any particular geographical location. We >> are seeing a virtual civil war in the USA apparently being instigated by >> Russians with no physical presence, no traditional weapons, no particular >> foot-ware. >> >> In the past couple decades, western commerce has become entirely dependent >> on reliable electronic communications. Yesterday I got call from a friend >> in NY who had to cancel his weekend visit because an airline faced major >> delays over computer glitches. Think about it. >> >> spike >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 18:53:45 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 11:53:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> Message-ID: <01f001d1f65d$3039c9a0$90ad5ce0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark ? ?>? Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact ?says Donald Trump was lying when he made it: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/ ? Quote from the article: >>?The bottom line: While the connections between the Clinton Foundation and the Russian deal may appear fishy, there?s simply no proof of any quid pro quo. Hmmm, imagine that: no proof. Gone, like the undergarments of Thomas Alfred Taylor. Whatever might have happened to that proof? Politifact is making a strong statement with their title: Donald Trump inaccurately suggests Clinton got paid to approve Russia uranium deal So where is Politifact?s proof of that? Does not Politifact realize that when Ms. Clinton apparently destroyed the evidence (in the Russia uranium deal, not the Taylor case) she took upon herself the burden of proof of her innocence any time anything looks fishy. Now, nearly everything she does appears fishy. Everything Nixon did suddenly appeared fishy as soon as we learned of the missing 18 minutes of yoga and wedding plans. This burden of proof will likely prove heavy indeed: America does not trust this person. We saw where the leaders of an entire major party conspired to defeat her challengers, then when caught, they were fired. But the dubious result was left to stand. That in itself brings about a whole genre of new and troubling questions about what happens if that party?s presumed candidate is presumed elected. >?But screw honesty? Counter-suggestion: do not screw honesty. >? sanity is vastly more important? Suggestion: do not screw sanity. >?and Donald Trump is nuts.? John K Clark So don?t vote for him. That was easy. Hear the footsteps, John. Especially in the likely event you live in a free state, hear the footsteps. This election will likely destroy both of the mainstream parties, and good riddance to both. What will fill that vacuum? My apologies, I didn?t mean to restart this distasteful (but in my opinion highly relevant here) discussion. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 20:37:35 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 21:37:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: <01f001d1f65d$3039c9a0$90ad5ce0$@att.net> References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> <01f001d1f65d$3039c9a0$90ad5ce0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 14 August 2016 at 19:53, spike wrote: > So don?t vote for him. That was easy. Hear the footsteps, John. > Especially in the likely event you live in a free state, hear the footsteps. > This election will likely destroy both of the mainstream parties, and good > riddance to both. What will fill that vacuum? > Facts don't matter, or change opinions. Both Trump and Clinton are manipulating emotions. The one with the best stories that get people stirred up will win. There are an awful lot of people that are fed up with politics as it has affected them since the 2008 crisis. Clinton is linked to the 'business as usual' politics that many people don't want. If Trump was a Mr Ed talking horse he'd still win. BillK From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 20:42:44 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 13:42:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! Message-ID: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> We know of conspiracy theorists, those nutty guys with their foil hats and such. But what if. somehow. for the first time in history. an actual conspiracy took place? Would we recognize it? Or would we just assume it was just another one of those crazy conspiracy theories, dismiss. I have one for you. Why is it that if you Google on Shawn Lucas, nearly all the relevant results are five days old? It is clear enough to me that millions of people are likely be chattering about him, yet Google seems to know nothing about the obvious question that must be burning up the wires. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at kurzweilai.net Sun Aug 14 21:10:22 2016 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (AMARA D ANGELICA) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:10:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <9A5697CC-4098-4EA2-8582-B75FA3BDE0E4@kurzweilai.net> Google advanced search constrained to one day returns many: https://goo.gl/N5OwhQ returns many. Last one, 1 minute ago. > On Aug 14, 2016, at 4:42 PM, spike wrote: > > > > We know of conspiracy theorists, those nutty guys with their foil hats and such. But what if? somehow? for the first time in history? an actual conspiracy took place? Would we recognize it? Or would we just assume it was just another one of those crazy conspiracy theories, dismiss. > > I have one for you. Why is it that if you Google on Shawn Lucas, nearly all the relevant results are five days old? It is clear enough to me that millions of people are likely be chattering about him, yet Google seems to know nothing about the obvious question that must be burning up the wires. > > spike > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 21:40:15 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:40:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 14, 2016 4:56 PM, "spike" wrote: > > > > > > We know of conspiracy theorists, those nutty guys with their foil hats and such. But what if? somehow? for the first time in history? an actual conspiracy took place? Conspiracy is one of the dominant modes of history. Many many things are decided between few people in secret for reasons that the public does not know. That's just how it works. It's absolutely silly to dismiss all theories on possible conspiracies as garbage. Most conspiracies are simply too niche to ever be revealed. But some do and you must be discerning. Or, you know, you could question nothing and listen to authority. That sounds very modern. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 14 21:29:44 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 14:29:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ok google game In-Reply-To: <012201d1f644$89b34010$9d19c030$@att.net> References: <012201d1f644$89b34010$9d19c030$@att.net> Message-ID: <025101d1f672$fa135290$ee39f7b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 8:57 AM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: [ExI] ok google game Idea: Create an OK Google game for people who develop a crush on the voice which speaks when one OK Googles. GG, will you go out with me? >Silly, I am already out with you. GG, I meant, will you date me? >OK. 1993?... spike Oh better idea: we could adapt OK Google results based on which personality or voice the user prefers. Think of all the possibilities. OK Google Optimist, where should I hang out this evening? * Oh man, you live in such a cool place! The possibilities are practically endless! I will limit suggestions to my top 8000 choices for things to do near you. Go! Have fun! Take me with you! Here are your directions. OK Google Pessimist, where should I hang out this evening? * Hang out? Why out? People get killed going out at night! There are gangs in the streets, drunks driving around everywhere, cops shooting people for no reason, and someone will probably break into your house while you are away. Stay home, be safe! OK Google Capitalist, where should I hang out this evening? * Lots of valuable business contacts are made in ordinary social situations! Here are your directions. OK Google Stoner, where should I hang out this evening? * Oh wow man, psychedelic happenings are all around you. All you need to do is open your mind, open your eyes, open your veins, tune in, turn on, drop out! Here are your directions. OK Google New York Immigrant Grandma, where should I hang out this evening? * Hang out you say? Vhat ist this hang out? You younk people, alvays with the hang out! Never you call! Never you write! Never you visit you grandmother! Here are you directionts. OK Google California Fast Woman, where should I hang out this evening? * Well, depends on what you are looking for and how much you want to spend, big guy. OK Google Religion Guy, where should I hang out this evening? * Death to infidels! Here are your directions. OK Google Jesus Freak, where should I hang out this evening? * Oh praise the Lord in his infinite mercy my friend! There are good prayer meetin's over at First Baptist, specializing in single born-agains, and at Second Methodist, for those praying for showers of blessing! May you find joy and love by serving the Lord! Here are your directions. OK Google Politics Follower, where should I hang out this evening? * Which brand of crazy do you prefer? For Republican, press one. For Democrat, press two. OK Google Philosopher, where should I hang out this evening? * There are at several competing schools of thought on that question, however before meaningful dialog can take place, we must first come to an agreement on objective definitions of the sometimes subjective terms "hang", "out", "evening", "should", "this", and "I." OK Google Macho Monster Trucker, where should I hang out this evening? * Real men, they would just drank some beyer, and none of that sissy LITE beyer neither, cuz that piss water ain't even beyer! Then a REAL man'd watch him some football and some NASCAR on the tube, wait for his buddies to show up and then the fun starts. OK Google Weird Guy, where should I hang out this evening? * There are places where they can't reach, but strawberry clones must always be guarded against when you come up against MASER-armed battleship cutlery and chemical abrasives constantly falling in those contrails. Run for your liiiiiife! OK Google Scientist, where should I hang out this evening? * There should be clear enough skies near you to observe the Perseid shower this evening. While you are out, notice the abundant nocturnal wildlife easily observed along the path to these locations. OK Google Fashionista, where should I hang out this evening? * {Lots of opportunity for selling paid ad links on this one.} OK Google Foodie or Wine Connoisseur, where should I hang out this evening? * {See above.} OK Google Extropian, where should I hang out this evening? * ? Come on, let's see some of that classic Extropian creative thinking. Propose your own category or voice, and propose some responses to common questions. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:36:23 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:36:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> <012e01d1f646$23b76460$6b262d20$@att.net> <01f001d1f65d$3039c9a0$90ad5ce0$@att.net> Message-ID: Especially in the likely event you live in a free state, hear the footsteps. > This election will likely destroy both of the mainstream parties, and good > riddance to both. What will fill that vacuum? > Maybe someone will start paying attention to the middle class. The ratings of our government, excluding Obama, are at, I think, historical lows, for both parties but particularly for the Repubs. Congress is simply not doing what the people want, if you can believe polls.. Repubs are against things the majority of Americans are for, such as low rules for abortion. I guess they just don't care and are voting their ideology rather than trying to represent the people. But the big question is; can moderates win? Does one have to be a big talking demagogue to win? So this election could be decided by the apathetic ones who are disgusted and won't vote. I think Hillary needs to drop bombs and avoid anything subtle or difficult for the average person to undersand. Got on the attack as strongly as possible. Get nasty. Humiliate him. Trump surely will and has. I'll vote for her but damned if i know what her positions are. Actually I don't even care. Need I say that we need politicians that have some integrity? Statesmen, we used to call them. p.s. the themes of scifi and fantasy are often those of war,love and social struggles, like mainstream fiction.But take a look at Ninefox Gambit. ill w On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:37 PM, BillK wrote: > On 14 August 2016 at 19:53, spike wrote: > > > So don?t vote for him. That was easy. Hear the footsteps, John. > > Especially in the likely event you live in a free state, hear the > footsteps. > > This election will likely destroy both of the mainstream parties, and > good > > riddance to both. What will fill that vacuum? > > > > Facts don't matter, or change opinions. Both Trump and Clinton are > manipulating emotions. The one with the best stories that get people > stirred up will win. There are an awful lot of people that are fed up > with politics as it has affected them since the 2008 crisis. Clinton > is linked to the 'business as usual' politics that many people don't > want. > > If Trump was a Mr Ed talking horse he'd still win. > > BillK > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:39:16 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:39:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Or, you know, you could question nothing and listen to authority. That sounds very modern. au contraire Will - just who are those authorities that people are blindly following? Politically, not religiously. bill w On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > On Aug 14, 2016 4:56 PM, "spike" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > We know of conspiracy theorists, those nutty guys with their foil hats > and such. But what if? somehow? for the first time in history? an actual > conspiracy took place? > > Conspiracy is one of the dominant modes of history. Many many things are > decided between few people in secret for reasons that the public does not > know. That's just how it works. It's absolutely silly to dismiss all > theories on possible conspiracies as garbage. Most conspiracies are simply > too niche to ever be revealed. But some do and you must be discerning. > > Or, you know, you could question nothing and listen to authority. That > sounds very modern. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:41:16 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:41:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: ?> ? > California's electors will go to the Democratic candidate, with over 99% > probability. > ?I don't know where you got that 99% figure. Historically betting odds have proven to be a better predictor of the future than polls or ?just about ? anything else and as of today ?they say ? there is a 93.5% probability that Clinton will win California and a 6.5% probability that Trump will ? win?. ?S? o ?I freely admit ? California is no ?t a? swing state but the probability that Trump will win it is not negligible ?; ? if there ?was ? a 6.5% chance I'd get killed the next time I drove my car to work I'd take the bus. In California voting for a third party candidate would only be 2.5 times less dangerous than playing Russian Roulette. ? > ?> ? > Now, if you would like to stop accusing the rest of us of wholeheartedly > supporting genocide when we are not in fact supporting genocide, in theory > or in practice, that would be appreciated. ?I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable but your your discomfort doesn't change the facts and reality can not be fooled. ? > ?> ? > As demonstrated, your chain of logic that suggests that third party votes > increase the chance of Trump's victory, regardless of what state said votes > are cast in, is in error. > ?This year voting for a third party is a very bad idea, in some states it would be a worse idea than others but no matter where you live it's always a bad idea. I've voted for the Libertarian Party candidate in the past and would probably do so again this time if it were a normal election, and unlike you I live in a swing state that's about 50-50, but this is far from a normal election because Donald Trump is not normal. ? ?> ? > I might almost wonder if you are a paid employee of the Democratic party: > ?Oh for Christs sake. John k Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:45:08 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:45:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: They are memetic, not human. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:51:30 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:51:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trolling Message-ID: Some of these discussions feel like trolling. We can do better. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 14 23:58:20 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:58:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trolling In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: ?> ? > Some of these discussions feel like trolling. > ?Like what? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 15 00:08:08 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:08:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal Message-ID: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Signal Looking at our energy future we have enough wind power, water power and solar installed that we can get some pretty good ideas about what they will produce and the environmental impacts of each. Those three will all be players, but we can pretty easily see all three combined are unlikely to carry the load. Anyone wish to dispute that conclusion? I would like to be shown the error of my ways. Space-based solar might take off, and I hope it does, but we face some daunting challenges. If SBS does not work out and we assume optimistic models of renewable growth and oil availability, we still get to a foreseeable future in which coal and nuclear power are carrying muck or most of the load. When that day comes, the USA will awaken from our slumber and realize we need to build nuke plants as fast as we can poke them into the ground. Then we will realize that allowing Russia to gain control of those sources was a very bad idea indeed. So I must ask, why did our State Department do that? On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Adrian Tymes > wrote: ?> ?>?California's electors will go to the Democratic candidate, with over 99% probability. ?>?there is a 93.5% probability that Clinton will win California and a 6.5% probability that Trump will ? win?. John k Clark ? Well sure, but the reasoning goes like this: if it is anywhere close in California, New York or Texas, then the non-owner of those states has already won by a landslide. So if it is close in any of those three states, the outcome of those three states is already irrelevant. In those states, if your vote matters, it doesn?t matter. But if it doesn?t matter in those states, it still doesn?t matter because you don?t live in one of the states where it does matter. Californians, New Yorkers, Texans, animals and proles are free. We can easily foresee bad things coming from either of the mainstream party candidates winning. That tells me we should protect our ability to claim we voted against that candidate if we live in a free state. Then we should work to remove from the president the ability to launch nukes. Reasoning: the constitution places the power to declare war on congress, not the executive branch. Congress should collectively control the nukes. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 00:28:30 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:28:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Reasoning: the constitution places the power to declare war on congress, not the executive branch. Congress should collectively control the nukes. spike I fully agree. Congress should have a say in any military action that does not require instant response. bill w On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 7:08 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Signal > > > > > > > > > > Looking at our energy future we have enough wind power, water power and > solar installed that we can get some pretty good ideas about what they will > produce and the environmental impacts of each. Those three will all be > players, but we can pretty easily see all three combined are unlikely to > carry the load. Anyone wish to dispute that conclusion? I would like to > be shown the error of my ways. > > > > Space-based solar might take off, and I hope it does, but we face some > daunting challenges. > > > > If SBS does not work out and we assume optimistic models of renewable > growth and oil availability, we still get to a foreseeable future in which > coal and nuclear power are carrying muck or most of the load. When that > day comes, the USA will awaken from our slumber and realize we need to > build nuke plants as fast as we can poke them into the ground. Then we > will realize that allowing Russia to gain control of those sources was a > very bad idea indeed. So I must ask, why did our State Department do that? > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > ?> ?>?California's electors will go to the Democratic candidate, with > over 99% probability. > > > > ?>?there is a 93.5% probability that Clinton will win California and a > 6.5% probability that Trump will > > ? win?. John k Clark ? > > > > Well sure, but the reasoning goes like this: if it is anywhere close in > California, New York or Texas, then the non-owner of those states has > already won by a landslide. So if it is close in any of those three > states, the outcome of those three states is already irrelevant. In those > states, if your vote matters, it doesn?t matter. But if it doesn?t matter > in those states, it still doesn?t matter because you don?t live in one of > the states where it does matter. > > > > Californians, New Yorkers, Texans, animals and proles are free. > > > > We can easily foresee bad things coming from either of the mainstream > party candidates winning. That tells me we should protect our ability to > claim we voted against that candidate if we live in a free state. Then we > should work to remove from the president the ability to launch nukes. > Reasoning: the constitution places the power to declare war on congress, > not the executive branch. Congress should collectively control the nukes. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 00:29:43 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:29:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: That is just not clear to me. bill w On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > They are memetic, not human. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 00:30:30 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:30:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Signal In-Reply-To: References: <0c4301d1f128$f6917a10$e3b46e30$@att.net> <008101d1f5e0$70c89cd0$5259d670$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 4:41 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > >> ?> ? >> California's electors will go to the Democratic candidate, with over 99% >> probability. >> > > ?I don't know where you got that 99% figure. Historically betting odds > have proven to be a better predictor of the future than polls > On a yes/no basis, perhaps. Getting exact probabilistic percentages from them, especially in edge cases like this? They're not accurate down to infinite detail. > your discomfort doesn't change the facts and reality can not be fooled. ? > But you can, and have been, by your own hysteria and myopia. Just because you live in a battleground state does not mean that the political truths that factor into your vote are true for the rest of us who live in other states. We get it: you won't vote Libertarian because you don't want Trump to win. We can vote Libertarian on your behalf, far more safely precisely because we are not in battleground states. ?> ? >> I might almost wonder if you are a paid employee of the Democratic party: >> > > ?Oh for Christs sake. > No, seriously. Your apocalyptic tone matches what I see repeatedly in their spam emails begging for donations. It's gotten very tiring. Some of them have equated not donating all one's money and time to them to actively working for Trump, just like you equate voting for anyone but Clinton to voting for Trump. You have explained your reasoning, but for most of us it is a false dilemma - a logical fallacy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 00:37:17 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:37:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> Message-ID: > > Space-based solar might take off, and I hope it does, but we face some > daunting challenges. > > > > If SBS does not work out and we assume optimistic models of renewable > growth and oil availability, we still get to a foreseeable future in which > coal and nuclear power are carrying muck or most of the load. When that > day comes, the USA will awaken from our slumber and realize we need to > build nuke plants as fast as we can poke them into the ground. Then we > will realize that allowing Russia to gain control of those sources was a > very bad idea indeed. So I must ask, why did our State Department do that? > 1) Because our State Department ultimately answers to voters today, who today don't like nuclear power. (That the dislike is based on bad information and logical fallacies is not directly relevant, although it does suggest how said dislike might be reversed.) 2) Because our State Department assumes SBS will not and can not work, at least within the career lifetime of anyone making the decisions there (and they don't care about anything beyond that), but in the near term wish to encourage dependency on fossil fuel corporations who have given a lot of money to those who say whether they get to keep their jobs (President, Vice President, and Congress). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 01:35:18 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 21:35:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 8:08 PM, spike wrote: > the USA will awaken from our slumber and realize we need to build nuke > plants as fast as we can poke them into the ground. Then we will realize > that allowing Russia to gain control of those sources was a very bad idea > indeed. Allowing Russia to gain control ?? Spike there is no shortage of Uranium, right now Uranium is the cheapest it's been in 11 years and? ?it's price has dropped ?25% this year alone and its only August. And if you're worried about Russia then worry about Trump. Vladimir Putin loves Trump so much he ordered his goons to hack into Democratic headquarters in hope of finding dirt to embarrass Clinton and Trump asked Putin, the leader of a foreign unfriendly government, to do even more illegal hacking against his political opponent and was dumb enough to do so publicly. Trump is not only crazy, intolerant and corrupt he's also stupid. > ?> ? > the constitution places the power to declare war on congress, not the > executive branch. ?Yes, that's what it is written on that paper.? > ?> ? > Congress should collectively control the nukes. ?It makes no difference what should happen, ? ?there is absolutely no chance ?that will happen in the next 4 years, but there is a 19.4% chance a madman will have total control of the nukes in 5 months. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 14 21:02:26 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 22:02:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> Message-ID: <8be112cd-e4c2-3447-65b5-d2ad60dd4f12@aleph.se> On 2016-08-14 18:18, spike wrote: > I disagree with Major Westerdahl. There are plenty of scenarios whereby > virtual warfare can be waged without hurling chunks of metal, without any > particular type of foot-ware in any particular geographical location. We > are seeing a virtual civil war in the USA apparently being instigated by > Russians with no physical presence, no traditional weapons, no particular > foot-ware. You can destabilize countries virtually. But can you occupy them? Clausewitz point was that "war is politics using other means" - there is a big spectrum of political actions and goals. Messing up a rival power and hoping that a useful idiot gets into power? Totally reasonable, and might have little downside if you have less to lose than the rival. But suppose you want to take the loot from the national museums and decorate your own museums with it? Then cyber or drones do not cut it. You either need to issue the right ultimatums and achieve coercion of the regime, or you need boots on the ground. Same thing if you want to institute a proper neopagan religious government, or stop the slaughter of some minority. The Delta chaos is, according to the infosec sources I read, more likely due to bad integration of various subsidiary computer systems bolted together rather than enemy action. If major corporations had software breakdowns just because cyberwarfare, then the world would be a *far* safer place. Instead it looks like we life in a world where attackers tend to have advantage, bad security practices such as security through obscurity thrive, bugs are dense, much of software is a huge systemic risk mess of interconnected dependencies (case in point: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/ ) and the incentives for getting real software quality are too weak. Do not ascribe to malice what is likely due to overly patched systemic incompetence. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From steinberg.will at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 03:11:12 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 23:11:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: They are cultural norms that prevent us from questioning power structures. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 07:40:27 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:40:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: <8be112cd-e4c2-3447-65b5-d2ad60dd4f12@aleph.se> References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> <8be112cd-e4c2-3447-65b5-d2ad60dd4f12@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Anders wrote: > You either need to issue the right ultimatums and achieve coercion of the > regime, or you need boots on the ground. Same thing if you want to > institute a proper neopagan religious government, or stop the slaughter of > some minority. ### As the utility of human labor becomes circumscribed, the meaning of "boots" could change. Today the term often implies a large organization of expensive and extensively trained, obedient men who put their lives at risk while credibly threatening or destroying the lives of others. In a few decades the task of destroying lives will be very efficiently and in a fine-grained fashion achieved by drones of the wildest variety of sizes and designs. A small poison-drone can kill any specified target. A network of surveillance and attack drones can supply information and prevent infiltration by enemy drones. The operator of a network of drones might decide to dispense with the human inhabitants of an area, after all, they will not be useful in any economic sense. But if for some reason the survival of humans is desired, and they need to be coerced, there will be no need for riflemen. Assassin drones might be a poor choice for delivering the human touch that is the core of any effective propaganda but there are always quislings who can be convinced to deliver messages to the ruled. Boots'2050 might mean dweebs in sandals going around the block and praising the occupying regime, gently suggesting submission, and pointing out the rewards of obedience. The grisly job of eliminating the non-suggestible subjects would be handled by inconspicuous drones and unmarked biological material disposal vans, perhaps manned by cheerful Asimo-type androids. Boots'2100 might mean just new settings on the brain-machine-interface devices universally implanted in all surviving biologicals. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 15:23:28 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 11:23:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> Message-ID: And speaking ?of? Russia.... just today ? The New York ?Times disclosed it found illegal off-the-books handwritten ledgers ? ? showing that ? Viktor Yanukovych ?, head of a pro-Russia political party, gave? ? ? Paul Manafort ?, Donald Trump's campaign manager, 12.7 million dollars, and they did so in CASH. This probably won't have as much impact as it should because Trump has done so many CRAZY things voters are starting to suffer from outrage fatigue, but Imagine what the people on this list would be saying if that had happened to Clinton instead of Trump! http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/paul-manafort-ukraine-donald-trump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 15:58:48 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 08:58:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 14, 2016 10:04 AM, "Anders Sandberg" wrote: > Which leads to a real question for the list: what are the technological requirements for being able to do this remotely? It seems that you would either need some form of telepresence system creating "infantry drones", or AI running them. In both cases the infantry drones must be able to function inside buildings, have enough sensory acuity to notice things, have the ability to interact at least to some extent with people, be able to use force in a graduated form (if the only option is to shoot people when you are trying to stop a possibly domestic quarrel, you are going to be in trouble soon). Don't forget the (re)education tech, so those in power can learn how to rule as the occupiers wish. A substantial fraction of the failures of the replacement Iraqi governments is clearly and directly attributable to their continuing to act in tribal and corrupt ways. (Yes, Spike, far more corrupt than Hillary. Such a thing is possible. You might want to read up on how they failed.) As to roboinfantry, look to the progress of powered battlesuits. Once they're working, the next step is to run them via remote control. The main limitation so far is power supply, but without the person inside they could carry a lot more fuel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 15 15:55:17 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 08:55:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <008101d1f70d$6bf2ba00$43d82e00$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal And speaking of? Russia.... ? Viktor Yanukovych, head of a pro-Russia political party, gave? Paul Manafort, Donald Trump's campaign manager, 12.7 million dollars, and they did so in CASH? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/paul-manafort-ukraine-donald-trump.html?hp &action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 ? John K Clark? They are corrupt John. Don?t vote for them. Johnson and Stein are rising in the polls without even doing anything, without significant contributions, without media coverage. Our leading politicians have found an easy way around campaign contribution limits, which results in a big advantage to those who have easy paths around the limits. So remove the limits, just to level the playing field. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 17:07:16 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:07:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: <008101d1f70d$6bf2ba00$43d82e00$@att.net> References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> <008101d1f70d$6bf2ba00$43d82e00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:55 AM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > Johnson and Stein are rising in the polls > > ?It takes 270 electoral votes to become president and? ?according to the latest ?betting odds there is a 96.5% probability that Johnson will not win one single electoral vote. Not one. And the probability for Stein winning one vote is even worse, it's so low there is no market for it because nobody will bet on her. And the election will happen in just 84 days. Voting for either would be a meaningless gesture that people will look back on and be ashamed if Trump should win. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 15 17:09:45 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:09:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f801d1f717$d30dcae0$792960a0$@att.net> >?] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World On Aug 14, 2016 10:04 AM, "Anders Sandberg" > wrote: > >? have the ability to interact at least to some extent with people, be able to use force in a graduated form (if the only option is to shoot people when you are trying to stop a possibly domestic quarrel, you are going to be in trouble soon)?Anders Ja! My bride is a direct descendant of a Los Angeles cop who was slain in the line of duty on a domestic quarrel call, in 1925. Those are every cop?s least favorite calls: they don?t know who is the bad guy, don?t know who is going pop out and shoot. Taking a domestic quarrel call is hazardous duty, every cop knows. They would rather take a robbery in progress call. Perfect application for a Robocop. You have probably seen this already, but consider how far we have come in just the past couple years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY Now imagine every cop going around with one of these in the trunk or the passenger side seat. Goes on a domestic disturbance call with a taser, sticky foam, tear gas (or skunk fluid (hey, that?s an idea for non-lethal deterrence to get the proles out of the house)) multiple redundant cameras, microphones and so on. It isn?t even clear to me that it would need to carry a sidearm necessarily (and really. It is better if it didn?t (might be scary as hell if it did (and could even add new catchphrases to our street vernacular (such as Freeze, Carbon Unit! and Don?t taze me Robo!)))) Slightly entertaining aside: a big hazard when cops go on a domestic: the family dog is scared and confused: mom is screaming and beating up dad, or vice versa, Rover doesn?t know what the hell to do. Then a third person shows up uninvited, menacing. The inner Doberman does what he does best, with a clear target and purpose. So how would Mister McBowser react when C3Cop-O shows up? I just thought it funny to imagine it, his going for the jugular and finding there isn?t one. Evolution has completely let him down. His psyche might never quite recover from the shock. >? A substantial fraction of the failures of the replacement Iraqi governments is clearly and directly attributable to their continuing to act in tribal and corrupt ways. (Yes, Spike, far more corrupt than Hillary. Such a thing is possible. You might want to read up on how they failed.)? Adrian Oh my, ja. Consider the situation in Haiti. The US and other countries sent billions in relief funds. Now we are hearing no one knows where most of the money went. Missing in action, still unaccounted for. The USA is in the minor leagues in the corruption department, depending on how it is counted: percentage of funds missing: minor league. Total amount of funds: top of the majors. American voters seem to be clamoring for more corruption. What bothers me most is that we appear to be in a critical transition time to an openly corrupt government. At some point Germany?s government did that, and we can pin it to a specific week: 30 June to 2 July 1934. The results were bad. Robo-cops do keep cops safer however. It is reasonable to expect them to be deployed soon. Any speculation on how that will work? spike Don't forget the (re)education tech, so those in power can learn how to rule as the occupiers wish. A substantial fraction of the failures of the replacement Iraqi governments is clearly and directly attributable to their continuing to act in tribal and corrupt ways. (Yes, Spike, far more corrupt than Hillary. Such a thing is possible. You might want to read up on how they failed.) As to roboinfantry, look to the progress of powered battlesuits. Once they're working, the next step is to run them via remote control. The main limitation so far is power supply, but without the person inside they could carry a lot more fuel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 15 17:15:40 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:15:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> <008101d1f70d$6bf2ba00$43d82e00$@att.net> Message-ID: <010201d1f718$a6bfabb0$f43f0310$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:55 AM, spike > wrote: ?> ?>?Johnson and Stein are rising in the polls ?>?It takes 270 electoral votes to become president and? according to the latest ?betting odds there is a 96.5% probability that Johnson will not win one single electoral vote. Not one? John K Clark John this is a public perception, not a percent probability. Trump isn?t going to stop saying crazy things, and those yoga routines are coming. We don?t know when, but we pretty much know what. They will leak. We do not know what will happen in the next three months, and do not know what happens when the leaks keep coming after the election. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 17:28:06 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:28:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] uranium was: RE: Signal In-Reply-To: <010201d1f718$a6bfabb0$f43f0310$@att.net> References: <010e01d1f689$1b0e75e0$512b61a0$@att.net> <008101d1f70d$6bf2ba00$43d82e00$@att.net> <010201d1f718$a6bfabb0$f43f0310$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 1:15 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > John this is a public perception, not a percent probability. ?The beauty of the free market in general and betting odds in particular is that they take all available information into account. They could still be wrong but they are quite literally your best bet. ? > ?> ? > those yoga routines are coming. We don?t know when, but we pretty much > know what. ?Maybe you know but I don't, and apparently the betting market doesn't know either. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 14 23:44:02 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 00:44:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] cool, an actual conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> References: <022001d1f66c$69af6be0$3d0e43a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <7e67a8e2-cc2d-8ea5-ba38-3bf528d1d507@aleph.se> I recently looked a bit at conspiracies (as a model for information retention). There are a fair number that have been documented, like the Glomar Explorer. The best data set was however the more boring category of business cartels: fairly large sums of money involved, the median time from formation to discovery is 5 years (but one persisted for 95 years). (http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/28650/1/wp060011a.pdf) Generally, conspiracy stability looks bad if it requires large groups aware of the conspiracy information. If the probability of leaking per year is p, then the probability of a leak per year is 1-(1-p)^N where N is the number of members. This is why the broad conspiracies conspiracy theorists like are unlikely (see the flawed but fun http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905 ). Compartmentalization might work: I assume for example that building the Glomar Explorer could be done with practically nobody involved aware of the actual intended use, and then it was just a matter of having the crew keep a secret. So a "conspiracy" of a search engine not finding stuff about someone could presumably be done well, since there might just be a handful of people messing with the database. The problem is that as soon as it is noticed, the force of scrutiny becomes terrible (Facebook and Twitter have encountered this). An interesting look at the problem of keeping stuff secret, from somebody in the signals intelligence world, is this: https://static.newamerica.org/attachments/4425-the-declining-half-life-of-secrets/Swire_DecliningHalf-LifeOfSecrets.f8ba7c96a6c049108dfa85b5f79024d8.pdf -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 16 02:37:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:37:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein Message-ID: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> I am not a Green, but I have developed a desperate school-girl crush on Dr. Stein: http://freebeacon.com/politics/cnn-interrupts-stein-rips-reckless-clinton-co nduct-favors-foundation-donors/ Why couldn't the Democrat party have found Stein to run as their candidate? She seems so honest and smart. Cool, I live in a free state, perhaps I will vote Green this time. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 16 17:25:30 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:25:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein In-Reply-To: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> References: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 10:37 PM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > I am not a Green, but I have developed a desperate school-girl crush on > Dr. Stein: > > http://freebeacon.com/politics/cnn-interrupts-stein- > rips-reckless-clinton-conduct-favors-foundation-donors/ > Why couldn?t the Democrat party have found Stein to run as their > candidate? She seems so honest and smart. Cool, I live in a free state, > perhaps I will vote Green this time. > ?Just like most members of this list Stein thinks it's more important to attack Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump. It's also interesting that free trade was at one time considered a important topic and Clinton supports free trade far far more strongly than Trump or Stein or Sanders, and yet except for me Clinton has received much more criticism around here than all 3 put together. And Clinton made public her tax returns going all the way back to 1977, even Nixon made public his tax return when he ran for president, but Trump will not. And yet it's Hillary who's crooked not Trump, it's Hillary who has something to hide not Trump. Oh and by the way, Trump is quite obviously crazy but never mind that little detail, let's see if we can think of more bad things to say about Hillary. I said a few months ago that I just didn't get it, and I still don't. I don't get the magnitude of the hatred aimed at Hillary that dwarfs that of any other candidate, even a crazy one. It's as if you were drowning and somebody tosses you a life preserver but you refuse to grab it because you don't like the color. John K Clark > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 16 18:12:56 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:12:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein In-Reply-To: References: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> Message-ID: <00a801d1f7e9$d1003f30$7300bd90$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>?Just like most members of this list Stein thinks it's more important to attack Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump? John, it?s simple. Clinton sold government favors while SoS, got crazy rich from it then attempted to destroy the evidence. We think someone has that evidence. We don?t know what will happen when those who have that evidence issue conflicting orders. >?It's also interesting that free trade was at one time considered a important topic and Clinton supports free trade? Ja, free trade in government favors. Access to power in exchange for donations. We get that. >? Clinton has received much more criticism around here than all 3 put together? We don?t criticize free trade. That part we like. We oppose government corruption. Remember that stuff Julian Assange used to post here? He was all about cleaning up government by shining the light on it. >.. And yet it's Hillary who's crooked not Trump? I never claimed Trump wasn?t crooked. Check out the eminent domain deals. Eminent domain is a legal abuse of power, which should be considered crooked. >? it's Hillary who has something to hide not Trump? You mean with a cloth or something? If she had nothing to hide, why didn?t she use the State Department server for State Department business? Answer: it would be automatically stored and out of her control. If she had nothing to hide, why did she attempt to wipe those yoga routines, instead of handing them over to a panel of judges sworn to not leak those yoga routines and wedding plans, not even the love notes to Bill. I think you are right on Trump: the reason he doesn?t hand over his tax returns is that he isn?t really a billionaire. If he isn?t rich, he has no real credentials. My guess is that he isn?t really all that rich, probably not as rich as the Clintons. The Clintons amassed a personal fortune of over 200 million dollars starting with nothing, without an actual company, without a product, without anything one can point to as capital assets other than artifacts looted from the White House. If being rich is a credential, the Clintons may have beaten Trump, without even selling anything one easily define. >?Oh and by the way, Trump is quite obviously crazy but never mind that little detail, let's see if we can think of more bad things to say about Hillary? Julian Assange may arrange for Hillary to say bad things about Hillary. Notice he hasn?t bluffed yet. And we don?t even know what the Russians have that Assange doesn?t. We don?t even have a good way of determining if the leaked info is genuine. Think about that one for a minute, all the potential mischief just from having a plausible story involving who knows what depth of corruption. >? I don't get the magnitude of the hatred aimed at Hillary that dwarfs that of any other candidate? Hillary?s corruption dwarfs any other candidate, successfully elected or otherwise, in the complete history of the USA. The sheer magnitude of it: Nixon erased 18 minutes of audio and was ridden out of town on a rail. Clinton has tens of thousands of emails containing material important enough to attempt to destroy even while it was under subpoena, and we still are not even allowed to see what was in there, as we are asked to vote. The potential damage once that starts coming out is difficult to even estimate, but once we see it, no one will again wonder why all the clearly illegal attempts to destroy that evidence were undertaken. We will understand more clearly the role of Brian Pagliano the Fifth. We will understand how it was that Huma Abedin was pulling down a huge State Department salary while being a paid consultant to other interests, and why it was that no one caught that, or if they did, they didn?t speak up. Where was the IRS then? Perhaps we will find out why it was a terrible crime for VP Cheney to be listed on a board of directors (inactive) while in government service, yet somehow it is OK for Abedin to be actively working for private interests while pulling down a government salary equivalent to a military general, all without apparent qualifications. The blatant hypocrisy is appalling. >?even a crazy one. It's as if you were drowning and somebody tosses you a life preserver but you refuse to grab it because you don't like the color. ?John K Clark Oh dear. The Clintons are now being compared to a life preserver, oy vey. John if I am found dead of no apparent cause, do let me assure you sir, it is bogus to the core, not that anyone could actually do anything. I would be Syme from Nineteen Eighty Four. I am in perfect health (thanks) BP 120/80, I love life! I love life more than life itself! Or? perhaps exactly equal to life itself, but I don?t do any drugs, not even alcohol, don?t smoke, eat light, I drive sanely in a Detroit with lots of airbags, sleep in my own bed every night and always have, I have no known adversaries. But I am calling out the painfully obvious in what is perhaps the riskiest behavior I have ever indulged: this heavily armed nation runs a very high risk of electing the most corrupt government in its history. Both the major parties have put forth undesirables while rejecting those far more qualified and less scary, all while being assured on all sides that third parties can never win, that government is the private property of the Republican and Democrat parties and always will be, others need not apply, regardless of how bad the majors are and regardless of how good are the alternatives. All this while we witness one of the major parties self-destruct, and other party nominate a candidate by cheating (then when caught, they fire three or four individuals but let the result stand.) I for one am not buying it. I do not accept that America must be forced to choose between a liberal war hawk and a liberal war hawk, with the difference between them being one is crazy and the other is criminal. It?s time to hear the footsteps and vote our conscience. My apologies, I know this kind of discussion doesn?t really belong here, and I am theoretically the one responsible for enforcing it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Aug 16 19:00:43 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 12:00:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein In-Reply-To: References: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:25 AM, John Clark wrote: snip > And yet it's Hillary who's crooked not Trump, it's Hillary > who has something to hide not Trump. Oh and by the way, Trump is quite > obviously crazy but never mind that little detail, let's see if we can think > of more bad things to say about Hillary. > > I said a few months ago that I just didn't get it, and I still don't. Irrational is not an easy strategy to understand. However, it's a strategy which worked for human genes _in some circumstances_ for the last few million years. I have expounded on the topic for a long time on this mailing list, apparently with little or no influence on the local meme set. Those circumstances, a bleak outlook on the future, are presently the way a substantial fraction of the US population sees things. That makes that fraction of the population a fertile media for xenophobic memes. Also, mapped from the stone age, that fraction is attracted to an irrational leader. I don't think people, not even here, understand how hardwired they are in such circumstances. But we are talking a long and strong genetic selection for mental mechanisms here. It may be that humans are even blocked by their evolved mental mechanisms from thinking "Whoa, WTF am I about to do?" > I don't get the magnitude of the hatred aimed at Hillary that dwarfs that of > any other candidate, even a crazy one. I don't think it has that much to do with Hillary, other than that she is not the crazy one. It's the fact that following irrational leaders, under similar circumstances, has been the right thing to do for your genes ever since human ancestors started fending off the big cats. Without the big cats to control human numbers, we had to do it ourselves with wars. Written into your genes is this strategy: "When things get bleak, demonize some inside or outside group and follow an irrational leader." Win or loose, it always got the population back in balance with the ecosystem that fed them. And because the young girls of the defeated were booty, on average the genes did better when you follow this rule than otherwise. So this is the meta level of what's going on with the local (US) politics. The meta-meta level is why people, even those who understand evolution, don't get this? Memes do wax and wane. It's fairly well accepted today, but 20 years ago I was lambasted from the bench by a Federal judge about recognizing status seeking (in myself) as a primary human motivation. Of course, Federal Judges are a first class example of status seeking. They give up a lot of income as lawyers to become judges. > It's as if you were drowning and > somebody tosses you a life preserver but you refuse to grab it because you > don't like the color. "It doesn't go with the color of my eyes." :-) Keith > John K Clark > > > > >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From dsunley at gmail.com Tue Aug 16 19:42:01 2016 From: dsunley at gmail.com (Darin Sunley) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:42:01 -0600 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein In-Reply-To: References: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> Message-ID: Stein herself may have a strong preference for Clinton over Trump, but by cultural convention politicians in an active race are not allowed to express any preferences other than the strong preference that they themselves win. It's a form of taboo. Maybe, perhaps, in the closing weeks of the race, when she's polling 5-10 points lower than Johnson, she may be allowed to express an endorsement for Clinton, at least to her followers in swing states. but certainly not until then. On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:25 AM, John Clark wrote: > > snip > > > And yet it's Hillary who's crooked not Trump, it's Hillary > > who has something to hide not Trump. Oh and by the way, Trump is quite > > obviously crazy but never mind that little detail, let's see if we can > think > > of more bad things to say about Hillary. > > > > I said a few months ago that I just didn't get it, and I still don't. > > Irrational is not an easy strategy to understand. However, it's a > strategy which worked for human genes _in some circumstances_ for the > last few million years. I have expounded on the topic for a long time > on this mailing list, apparently with little or no influence on the > local meme set. > > Those circumstances, a bleak outlook on the future, are presently the > way a substantial fraction of the US population sees things. That > makes that fraction of the population a fertile media for xenophobic > memes. Also, mapped from the stone age, that fraction is attracted to > an irrational leader. I don't think people, not even here, understand > how hardwired they are in such circumstances. But we are talking a > long and strong genetic selection for mental mechanisms here. It may > be that humans are even blocked by their evolved mental mechanisms > from thinking "Whoa, WTF am I about to do?" > > > I don't get the magnitude of the hatred aimed at Hillary that dwarfs > that of > > any other candidate, even a crazy one. > > I don't think it has that much to do with Hillary, other than that she > is not the crazy one. It's the fact that following irrational > leaders, under similar circumstances, has been the right thing to do > for your genes ever since human ancestors started fending off the big > cats. Without the big cats to control human numbers, we had to do it > ourselves with wars. > > Written into your genes is this strategy: "When things get bleak, > demonize some inside or outside group and follow an irrational > leader." Win or loose, it always got the population back in balance > with the ecosystem that fed them. And because the young girls of the > defeated were booty, on average the genes did better when you follow > this rule than otherwise. > > So this is the meta level of what's going on with the local (US) politics. > > The meta-meta level is why people, even those who understand > evolution, don't get this? > > Memes do wax and wane. It's fairly well accepted today, but 20 years > ago I was lambasted from the bench by a Federal judge about > recognizing status seeking (in myself) as a primary human motivation. > Of course, Federal Judges are a first class example of status seeking. > They give up a lot of income as lawyers to become judges. > > > It's as if you were drowning and > > somebody tosses you a life preserver but you refuse to grab it because > you > > don't like the color. > > "It doesn't go with the color of my eyes." :-) > > Keith > > > John K Clark > > > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> spike > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> extropy-chat mailing list > >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 16 21:21:36 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:21:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-08-14 19:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Will hackers win the next war? It might be more relevant to ask whether hackers will win the next diplomatic negotiation. Really interesting response from Snowden about the claimed sale of NSA malware by a third party group: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160816/07465535255/ed-snowden-explains-why-hackers-published-nsas-hacking-tools.shtml https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/765513662597623808 The most relevant part here is his speculation about motivation: > /Why did they do it? No one knows, but I suspect this is more > diplomacy than intelligence, related to the escalation around the DNC > hack. Circumstantial evidence and conventional wisdom indicates > Russian responsibility. Here's why that is significant: This leak is > likely a warning that someone can prove US responsibility for any > attacks that originated from this malware server. That could have > significant foreign policy consequences. Particularly if any of those > operations targeted US allies. Particularly if any of those operations > targeted elections. Accordingly, this may be an effort to influence > the calculus of decision-makers wondering how sharply to respond to > the DNC hacks./ Now in the light of the otherwise fairly laid back Bruce Schneier reacting very strongly to the DNC hack implications ( https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/2016/0815.html#1 ) it is not implausible that the claimed sale is a defensive move. It is enticing to focus on deadly drones, things blowing up, and breaking infrastructure. But a lot is just stratagems to mess with the other side. Of course, it is not inconceivable that this whole story is just a bunch of random things with little plan in the first place - subtle plans are vulnerable to unrelated events. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 16 22:07:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:07:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> Message-ID: <014201d1f80a$9f99c030$decd4090$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 2:22 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World On 2016-08-14 19:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >>. Will hackers win the next war? >.It might be more relevant to ask whether hackers will win the next diplomatic negotiation. Ja. The hacking led to this paradoxical comment in the article: >.Even so, we have to accept that someone is attacking our nation's computer systems in an apparent attempt to influence a presidential election. Sure, but it resulted in catching the head of the DNC, who unfairly attempted to influence the nomination of her party and lost her job. So this is a case where hacking caught the bad guy. This is a good thing, ja? On the other hand, the result was allowed to stand, even though it was derived through cheating. What does that tell us? If hacking catches the bad guy, is the hacker a bad guy? Or does the hacker become the good guy? >. And it points to the possibility of an even worse problem in November -- that our election systems and our voting machines could be vulnerable to a similar attack. Well ja. We know those machines can be hacked: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/08/10/an-easy-to-find-15-piece-of-hardwar e-is-all-it-takes-to-hack-a-voting-machine/#gref And yet. still. with that known risk, the obvious solution is not even suggested: get rid of those goddam voting machines. Replace them all with a system that leaves a permanent auditable re-countable paper trail. Now, wasn't that simple? We still have paper ballot boxes in many places; voters punch out their ballots on paper cards, then physically drop their ballots in the box. Then a group of people of all political persuasions follow that box every minute from the time it leaves the polling place until the time it arrives at the countiong place and all the paper ballots are counted and filed. But the voting machines? No, those are different. No need to watch those. Those don't count. They are just votes, not paper ballots, and besides no one is quite sure what is actually going on there anyway, if anything at all. OK sure, so what happens if a candidate appears to have won with plenty of evidence of cheating? Do we care if Americans lose faith in the democratic process? Do we then just shrug and let the suspicious result stand? Or what? Anders this problem has been sticking in my craw at least since November 2000, if not before. We had a suspicious result, there was no way to recount some of the ballots, and the questionable outcome was left to stand. There were consequences. And yet, inexplicably, no one seems to want to create a massive bipartisan effort to get rid of any and all voting systems dependent in any way on electronics in any form. Oy. Hey cool, a post free of any partisan political content! By me of all people. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 16 23:39:20 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:39:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: <014201d1f80a$9f99c030$decd4090$@att.net> References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> <014201d1f80a$9f99c030$decd4090$@att.net> Message-ID: yet, inexplicably, no one seems to want to create a massive bipartisan effort to get rid of any and all voting systems dependent in any way on electronics in any form. Oy. Hey cool, a post free of any partisan political content! By me of all people. spike I agree with all of that, Spike, but to me the major cause of corruption in the voting process is gerrymandering in the state legislatures by the party in power. I saw just a few days ago a North Carolina law was struck down that essentially inhibited blacks from voting - by a Repub legis., natch. I have no idea what to do about this problem, but it's a big one, far more pervasive than the problems you mention. Win at any cost is the motto. Cheat and even if you get sued the court might be stacked for you. Mississippi does this constantly. You have to go to federal court to get relatively unbiased judgments. (yeah, Dems do it too) bill w On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 5:07 PM, spike wrote: > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Anders > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2016 2:22 PM > *To:* extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World > > > > On 2016-08-14 19:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > >>? Will hackers win the next war? > > > >?It might be more relevant to ask whether hackers will win the next > diplomatic negotiation? > > > > Ja. The hacking led to this paradoxical comment in the article: > > > > >?Even so, we have to accept that someone is attacking our nation's > computer systems in an apparent attempt to influence a presidential > election? > > > > Sure, but it resulted in catching the head of the DNC, who unfairly > attempted to influence the nomination of her party and lost her job. So > this is a case where hacking caught the bad guy. This is a good thing, > ja? On the other hand, the result was allowed to stand, even though it was > derived through cheating. What does that tell us? If hacking catches the > bad guy, is the hacker a bad guy? Or does the hacker become the good guy? > > > > >? And it points to the possibility of an even worse problem in November > -- that our election systems and our voting machines could be vulnerable to > a similar attack? > > > > Well ja. We know those machines can be hacked: > > > > http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/08/10/an-easy-to-find-15- > piece-of-hardware-is-all-it-takes-to-hack-a-voting-machine/#gref > > > > And yet? still? with that known risk, the obvious solution is not even > suggested: get rid of those goddam voting machines. Replace them all with > a system that leaves a permanent auditable re-countable paper trail. Now, > wasn?t that simple? > > > > We still have paper ballot boxes in many places; voters punch out their > ballots on paper cards, then physically drop their ballots in the box. > Then a group of people of all political persuasions follow that box every > minute from the time it leaves the polling place until the time it arrives > at the countiong place and all the paper ballots are counted and filed. > But the voting machines? No, those are different. No need to watch > those. Those don?t count. They are just votes, not paper ballots, and > besides no one is quite sure what is actually going on there anyway, if > anything at all. > > > > OK sure, so what happens if a candidate appears to have won with plenty of > evidence of cheating? Do we care if Americans lose faith in the democratic > process? Do we then just shrug and let the suspicious result stand? Or > what? > > > > Anders this problem has been sticking in my craw at least since November > 2000, if not before. We had a suspicious result, there was no way to > recount some of the ballots, and the questionable outcome was left to > stand. There were consequences. And yet, inexplicably, no one seems to > want to create a massive bipartisan effort to get rid of any and all voting > systems dependent in any way on electronics in any form. Oy. > > > > Hey cool, a post free of any partisan political content! By me of all > people. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 00:26:00 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 20:26:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] crush on stein In-Reply-To: <00a801d1f7e9$d1003f30$7300bd90$@att.net> References: <002e01d1f767$21da93c0$658fbb40$@att.net> <00a801d1f7e9$d1003f30$7300bd90$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > John, it?s simple. Clinton sold government favors while SoS, got crazy > rich from it And yet none of Clinton's ?ill gotten ? crazy riches showed up in any of her tax returns since ? ? 1977 nor of those of the Clinton Foundation which according to Fox news and AM radio ?right wing ? talk shows is a criminal syndicate ? more evil than ISIS. > > If she had nothing to hide, why didn?t she use the State Department > server for State Department business? > ?Because, as she admitted, she was careless and made a stupid mistake; stupid but not as stupid as ordering the military to torture and murder the children of people the US government does't like even when the army says they will mutant if they are given such a order. And not as stupid as saying ?"? We should have kept the oil ?" when the USA invaded Iraq in 2003 ?because " to the victor belonged the spoils ?"?; and not as stupid as believing that doing so could be done without permanently ? stationing half a million American troops in Iraq and watching tens of thousands of them die each year in combat and turning Iraq into a terrorism generator far beyond anything seen in the world has ever seen. And now I have a question for you, if she had something to hide why didn't she spend 45 seconds and just open a anonymous Gmail account? ? > > The Clintons amassed a personal fortune of over 200 million dollars ? ?According to ? Politifact ? ?it's 55 million. > ?> ? > starting with nothing, without an actual company, without a product ?JK Rowling is worth well north of a billion dollars; ?a ex-president's books and speeches are never going to be as popular as Harry Potter but he can still make money. ?> ? > Hillary?s corruption dwarfs any other candidate, successfully elected or > otherwise, in the complete history of the USA. ? Wow that's quite a charge! Odd that James Comey ?, George W Bush's ? Deputy Attorney General ? and current Republican head of the FBI, couldn't find anything in her behavior that was worth worth prosecuting. ? > > We will understand how it was that Huma Abedin was pulling down a huge > State Department salary > ?Ah, ? ?I don't think anybody in the State Department pulls down a huge salary.? > > while being a paid consultant to other interests, and why it was that no > one caught that, or if they did, they didn?t speak up. Where was the IRS > then? ?I don't know any of the details but apparently the IRS ?didn't find anything interesting in it, and they still don't. > > >> ?>? >> It's as if you were drowning and somebody tosses you a life preserver but >> you refuse to grab it because you don't like the color. > > > ?> ? > Oh dear. The Clintons are now being compared to a life preserver > I think it ? was ? a rather good metaphor ? if I do say so myself. Hillary Clinton ? is the only thing standing between us and a mad Commander In Chief of a nuclear armed nation. You may wish there was something else, I do too, but that's all we've got and it's far more important to avoid a dreadful president than it is to elect a good one or even a great one because there is a ceiling to good but there is no bottom to bad. > > ?> ? > the difference between them being one is crazy and the other is criminal. ?I don't think Hillary is a criminal but let's superpose she is. We know for a fact that in the nuclear age we can survive a criminal president because we've already done so, but we've never had a crazy president and it's far from clear we can survive one. > ?> ? > It?s time to hear the footsteps and vote our conscience. ?I am of the opinion that my life and that of billions of others is more important than my conscience. ? ?> ? > My apologies, I know this kind of discussion doesn?t really belong here, > and I am theoretically the one responsible for enforcing it. ?No need to apologize, I think the discussion does belong here, and now is the time to have it.There is no point in discussing what we should do in a billion years when the sun becomes a red giant if a man who never heard a conservancy theory he didn't believe takes command on the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet in 5 months. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 00:22:48 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 17:22:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Our Ageing World In-Reply-To: References: <00e801d1f630$9a61f870$cf25e950$@att.net> <018701d1f64f$d44cd770$7ce68650$@att.net> <014201d1f80a$9f99c030$decd4090$@att.net> Message-ID: <019301d1f81d$7c761af0$756250d0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 4:39 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Our Ageing World >>?yet, inexplicably, no one seems to want to create a massive bipartisan effort to get rid of any and all voting systems dependent in any way on electronics in any form. Oy. >>?Hey cool, a post free of any partisan political content! By me of all people. spike >?I agree with all of that, Spike, but to me the major cause of corruption in the voting process is gerrymandering in the state legislatures by the party in power? Ja. We can work these problems simultaneously, being as they are completely orthogonal. The problem you describe is incumbent advantage: the party in power can stack the deck. We are seeing this in nearly a runaway condition, with the likely upcoming question of self-pardon at the presidential level. Nixon asked in jest if it could be invoked; witnesses report laughter at the suggestion. Bill Clinton almost did use it in a lawsuit brought against him for sexual harassment; he sought to postpone the proceedings until after his term, which would have been circling dangerously close to a self-pardon. That was the case that resulted in questioning of Monica Lewinsky under oath, and you know the rest. Now we have an interesting variation on that theme: pre-emptive successor pardon. Review what the current president has uttered regarding his presumptive successor: was not that a defacto successor pardon? Since his presumptive successor will have the power to pardon her predecessor, is not this equivalent to an indirect self-pardon? For instance, what if we find among the yoga routines evidence that the current president knew his presumed successor was using an unsecured server for state business? He would need a pardon for not immediately removing her from office, and the person he pardoned would be in a position to extend a pardon back to him. >?I saw just a few days ago a North Carolina law was struck down that essentially inhibited blacks from voting - by a Repub legis., natch? Indeed? I am surprised I never heard that North Carolina had laws regarding one?s race as a condition of eligibility to vote. How do they do it if one is mixed race, and has the DNA evidence to prove it? May they vote if they are over half an eligible race? What is the required percentage of DNA required to inhibit a voter in North Carolina? >?I have no idea what to do about this problem, but it's a big one, far more pervasive than the problems you mention? Vote the bastards out of office, and start by brutally destroying all voting machines with any electronic components. Light the polling place with human-electric generation, with all other sources of electricity shut off. Then repeal all laws inhibiting any particular race from voting. >?Win at any cost is the motto?. Review the work of Saul Alinsky. >?Cheat and even if you get sued the court might be stacked for you? See above. >?Mississippi does this constantly? They studied Alinsky too. His writings have been perhaps the single most negative and destructive influence on civilized government in the 20th century. The curse continues into the 21st. >?You have to go to federal court to get relatively unbiased judgments? For now, ja. What happens when they too become corrupt as Mississippi and North Carolina? >?(yeah, Dems do it too) bill w Imagine that. I will be far more optimistic as soon as I see states make a move toward not just ridding themselves of all electronic voting machines but using sledge hammers and a steam roller to ensure they will never be a temptation to future power seekers. Second, they must establish some means of ensuring that all ballots cast are correctly and accurately counted, in some verifiable manner. Third, demonstrate a meaningful effort to ensure protection against ballot stuffing, and that every person who submits a ballot is legally entitled to do so, which means legal citizenship and (in most states) no felony criminal history. Those steps will be a good start, ja? Think of it BillW: America is on the verge of selecting between two candidates, both widely distrusted by the majority of Americans, yet here we sit with no way of verifying the outcome of the election. Regardless of which wins, will be left having to take the word of the government (which over half the people do not trust) on who won. How will we know? Either winner might lead us into a war in which few Americans have anything to gain and much to lose, and yet? we will still have no way to know if that leader was legally elected. This bodes ill. Why is it that we have known for a long time about the voting machine problem, yet we seem to be making little progress? What happens if we see plenty of evidence the Russians did rig those things? Do we scold the Russians then let the result stand? But the winner will have little interest in scolding the Russians for helping him or her win, ja? Suggestions please? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 05:08:14 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 01:08:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump Message-ID: Trump Trump Trump Clinton Clinton Clinton Jeesus! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 05:09:52 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:09:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <022901d1f845$97140ac0$c53c2040$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki Subject: [ExI] Trump Trump Trump Trump Clinton Clinton Clinton Jeesus! Yes, my son? {8^D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Aug 17 07:41:15 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:41:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup Message-ID: <2d07a209-1904-a09a-cc5e-d74d992be0e6@aleph.se> Ted Berger is commercializing the research on the hippcaompus chip: http://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/bionics/new-startup-aims-to-commercialize-a-brain-prosthetic-to-improve-memory http://kernel.co/ This is the first brain prosthetic - normal deep brain stimulation just sends signals into the brain in the right spot to balance a malfunction crudely, but this aims at performing a function. And yes, it can be used for enhancement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919468/ -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 08:16:16 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:16:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup In-Reply-To: <2d07a209-1904-a09a-cc5e-d74d992be0e6@aleph.se> References: <2d07a209-1904-a09a-cc5e-d74d992be0e6@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 17 August 2016 at 08:41, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Ted Berger is commercializing the research on the hippcaompus chip: > > http://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/bionics/new-startup-aims-to-commercialize-a-brain-prosthetic-to-improve-memory > http://kernel.co/ > > This is the first brain prosthetic - normal deep brain stimulation just > sends signals into the brain in the right spot to balance a malfunction > crudely, but this aims at performing a function. And yes, it can be used for > enhancement: > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919468/ > > Interesting. But to keep this relevant to the list objectives, how does this affect Trump's election prospects? BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 13:34:24 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 06:34:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup In-Reply-To: References: <2d07a209-1904-a09a-cc5e-d74d992be0e6@aleph.se> Message-ID: <006001d1f88c$1247a490$36d6edb0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup On 17 August 2016 at 08:41, Anders Sandberg wrote: ... > >>... This is the first brain prosthetic - normal deep brain stimulation ... > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919468/ > > Interesting. But to keep this relevant to the list objectives, how does this affect Trump's election prospects? BillK _______________________________________________ Hmmmm... OK got it! We create peace-chips and implant them in all the leading candidates! It detects whenever they get peaceful thoughts and stimulates the region of the brain associated with sexual arousal. spike From sparge at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 15:27:33 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:27:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] book In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > ### Anything that "smashes" the statin hypothesis is complete baloney. > Statins lower all-cause mortality in specified populations in multiple > large randomized placebo-controlled trials. This is the end of story. There > is no "statin hypothesis", there are only statin facts. > Sorry for the delayed reaction, here. The "statin hypothesis" is that treating cholesterol above a certain level with statins is medically recommended. That level has been consistently lowered over the years. The fact that statins lower all-cause mortality in specified populations doesn't "prove" the statin hypothesis unless the specified population is "everyone with cholesterol level over N", which doesn't seem to be the case. From a quick google, it appears the population helped is those with non-obstructive coronary artery disease. Lowering mortality is great, but how much is it lowered and at what cost? Statins aren't without side effects. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 16:17:09 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:17:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: ?> ? > Trump Trump Trum > ?p? > Clinton Clinton Clinton > ? ? > Jeesus! > ?Well, ... if they're all on the ballot I'll still vote for Clinton. I don't like Jesus's policy of waterboarding people for, not a billion years but for an infinite number of years. Apologists for Jesus say it's only for a countably infinite number of years, the smallest sort of infinity, but I still think that's just a tad too long. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 16:20:53 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:20:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup In-Reply-To: <006001d1f88c$1247a490$36d6edb0$@att.net> References: <2d07a209-1904-a09a-cc5e-d74d992be0e6@aleph.se> <006001d1f88c$1247a490$36d6edb0$@att.net> Message-ID: Hmmmm... OK got it! We create peace-chips and implant them in all the leading candidates! It detects whenever they get peaceful thoughts and stimulates the region of the brain associated with sexual arousal. I get what you are saying - you want to reward the peaceful impulse. But I suggest that adding more testosterone-filled impulses to a political person is tossing gas on a fire. Too much of that hormone makes one just crazy and I am, as a psychologist, not kidding! Q - where do you find the women with the highest average testosterone level? A - prison. Males are much the same. High testosterone (Hillary's problem?) I actually talked about this with my endocrinologist. I asked her if, in the future, it could be possible to alter the timer in the brain to just release certain hormones at certain times of day, and she said YES. So I propose altering candidates' hormone levels to where the sex hormones are very low until after the election. (Would Trump have anything at all to say?) bill w On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:34 AM, spike wrote: > > >... On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: Re: [ExI] Brain prosthetic startup > > On 17 August 2016 at 08:41, Anders Sandberg wrote: > ... > > > >>... This is the first brain prosthetic - normal deep brain stimulation > ... > > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919468/ > > > > > > Interesting. But to keep this relevant to the list objectives, how does > this > affect Trump's election prospects? > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > > > Hmmmm... OK got it! We create peace-chips and implant them in all the > leading candidates! It detects whenever they get peaceful thoughts and > stimulates the region of the brain associated with sexual arousal. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 16:54:52 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:54:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: ?> ? Trump Trump Trum ?p? Clinton Clinton Clinton ? ? Jeesus! ?Well, ... if they're all on the ballot I'll still vote for Clinton. I don't like Jesus's policy of waterboarding people for, not a billion years but for an infinite number of years. Apologists for Jesus say it's only for a countably infinite number of years, the smallest sort of infinity, but I still think that's just a tad too long. John K Clark? I?m not an expert on that, but as I understood it, it isn?t Jeesus but rather his old man who does the infinite waterboarding, using mixture of boiling windex and cat urine, and all such unpleasantness. Jesus was head of the pardons department and the virgins, as I vaguely recall. Granted I might have them conflated with another religion guy. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 17:22:22 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:22:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] distribution of power, was: RE: Brain prosthetic startup Message-ID: <018a01d1f8ab$eabc4c80$c034e580$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?So I propose altering candidates' hormone levels to where the sex hormones are very low until after the election. (Would Trump have anything at all to say?) bill w Sure that?s a good start. But another reasonable approach would be to distribute the authority to launch aggressive military action over several people. Oh wait, someone already thought of that: the framers of the constitution. Those guys already realized the danger of allowing one person to make the call on that, and they did it a long time ago, way before email existed. They realized that one guy could be bribed, bluffed or blackmailed into launching a military attack on someone else?s enemy with no benefit to those having to pay the price for it (not that this has already happened (recently.)) Consider this: Franklin Roosevelt was screaming to enter WW2. Congress told him no. Then when the Japanese hit Pearl, possibly as a result of being provoked by Roosevelt, congress went along. A decade went by. Truman wanted to enter the Korean war, congress said no. He ordered military peacekeepers, who then became warriors. Another decade went by. Kennedy wanted to enter the Vietnam war, congress said no. Following Truman?s precedent, he sent peacekeepers. They became warriors. Johnson escalated it, again without congressional approval. Now, with the nukes being controlled by the executive branch, and all armed conflicts redefined as peacekeeping or regime change, we effectively handed over the authority to wage war to the executive branch and made the legislative branch nearly irrelevant. So here we are in the position from which the framers of the constitution protected us and we defeated. Natural result: America is in a virtual civil war over a question that shouldn?t be all that important: who will be president. Reason: that office was never designed to carry all the power it has. Since we tack on all this extra power to that office, it makes that office attractive to power grabbers and power abusers. Note that both major candidates are power grabbers and power abusers. Does this surprise us? Why? We have a guy who is spending millions of his own money to get a job which pays a fraction of that amount. Why would he want it? We have a person who sold government favors for enormous sums, so it is perfectly clear why she would want access to still more government power. No mystery there. Of the major party nominees, one has already cashed in on and abused political power and the other apparently plans to. Solution: restore that office to the level of authority it was originally designed for. Get that nuclear goddam football away from that office, put it where it should have gone to start with: the speaker of the house, with a panel of about a dozen legislators responsible for it. We don?t need those things on a hair trigger now. We have instant communications available for everyone on a proposed nuclear football team, and we have early warning systems to tell us if an attack is coming, we have sea-based missiles that cannot be taken out by first strike. Let us make it to where police action military exercises are restricted to a subset of the military. By parking all that power in one office, we have made it far too attractive to all the wrong kinds of people. We brought these problems on ourselves. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 18:45:31 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:45:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: Recently made a post that started with "Irrational is not an easy strategy to understand." No replies at all. There are two reasons for that. One is that the post went right over everyone's head. Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to add to it. If it was the first, I should find another news group. Best wishes, Keith From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 18:53:50 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:53:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Aug 17, 2016 11:47 AM, "Keith Henson" wrote: > Recently made a post that started with "Irrational is not an easy > strategy to understand." > > No replies at all. > > There are two reasons for that. > > One is that the post went right over everyone's head. > > Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to > add to it. I'm mostly staying out of the politics threads for now, but since you asked: that sentence you quoted, I agree with. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:00:25 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:00:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to > add to it. > I got it but didn't have anything to add. Please stay. :-) -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tech101 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:01:57 2016 From: tech101 at gmail.com (Adam A. Ford) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 02:01:57 +0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: According to this article, hell began with Plato, and was adopted into Christianity ~2nd century AD. I don't think hell was mentioned in the old testament. http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/death/origin-of- hell-fire.php#.V7SvSKJc66w [image: Inline image 1] Kind regards, Adam A. Ford Chair - Science, Technology & the Future , Director - Future Day , Co-Orgnaniser - Effective Altruism Global (Melbourne) Mob: +61 421 979 977 | Email: tech101 at gmail.com * Science, Technology & the Future * (Meetup / Facebook / YouTube ) *Future Day - "Join the conversation on Future Day March 1st to explore the possibilities about how the future is transforming us. You can celebrate Future Day however you like, the ball is in your court ? feel free to send a photo of your Future Day gatherings to info at futureday.org , and your jubilation may wind up being commemorated on the Future Day website and the Facebook page! "* SciFuture | H+ Australia | Singularity Summit Australia | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Future Day | Effective Altruism Global "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert Einstein", New York Times, 25 May 1946) Please consider the environment before printing this email On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:54 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Trump > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > ?> ? > > Trump Trump Trum > > ?p? > > Clinton Clinton Clinton > > ? ? > > Jeesus! > > > > ?Well, ... if they're all on the ballot I'll still vote for Clinton. I > don't like Jesus's policy of waterboarding people for, not a billion years > but for an infinite number of years. Apologists for Jesus say it's only for > a countably infinite number of years, the smallest sort of infinity, but I > still think that's just a tad too long. > > > > John K Clark? > > > > > > I?m not an expert on that, but as I understood it, it isn?t Jeesus but > rather his old man who does the infinite waterboarding, using mixture of > boiling windex and cat urine, and all such unpleasantness. Jesus was head > of the pardons department and the virgins, as I vaguely recall. Granted I > might have them conflated with another religion guy. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:10:55 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:10:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: > >> Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to >> add to it. >> > > I got it but didn't have anything to add. Please stay. :-) > > -Dave > ?Me too. ditto. Yes, - number two. Actually, if you want a discussion about irrationality with this psychologist, you can have one any time, but be prepared for ARistotle, Plato, Freud, Jung, Adler, Pinker et alia. The word 'strategy' seems a bit odd. That is, if one can recognize that a rational strategy and an irrational strategy exists, why would pick the irrational? Or is that your question? bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:16:15 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:16:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: According to this article, hell began with Plato, and was adopted into Christianity ~2nd century AD. I don't think hell was mentioned in the old testament. Adam A Ford So it is suggested that they just made it up as they went along, like marketing tactics? I could agree with that. IF looked at as a business, religion is far and away the most successful business ever. "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert Einstein", New York Times, 25 May 1946) Now this quote is interesting: just how does one conceive of a new way of conception? Or did Einstein follow this up with suggestions? bill w On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Adam A. Ford wrote: > According to this article, hell began with Plato, and was adopted into > Christianity ~2nd century AD. I don't think hell was mentioned in the old > testament. > > http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/death/ > origin-of-hell-fire.php#.V7SvSKJc66w > > > [image: Inline image 1] > > > Kind regards, > > Adam A. Ford > Chair - Science, Technology & the Future , Director > - Future Day , Co-Orgnaniser - Effective Altruism > Global (Melbourne) > Mob: +61 421 979 977 | Email: tech101 at gmail.com > > > * Science, Technology & the Future * (Meetup > / Facebook > / YouTube > ) > > *Future Day - "Join the conversation on Future Day > March 1st to explore the possibilities about how the future is transforming > us. You can celebrate Future Day however you like, the ball is in your > court ? feel free to send a photo of your Future Day gatherings to > info at futureday.org , and your jubilation may wind up > being commemorated on the Future Day website and the Facebook page! > "* > > SciFuture | H+ Australia > | Singularity Summit Australia | > Facebook > > | Twitter | YouTube > | Future Day | > Effective Altruism Global > > "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move > toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert Einstein", New > York Times, 25 May 1946) > > Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:54 PM, spike wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> *>?* *On Behalf Of *John Clark >> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Trump >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < >> rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> ?> ? >> >> Trump Trump Trum >> >> ?p? >> >> Clinton Clinton Clinton >> >> ? ? >> >> Jeesus! >> >> >> >> ?Well, ... if they're all on the ballot I'll still vote for Clinton. I >> don't like Jesus's policy of waterboarding people for, not a billion years >> but for an infinite number of years. Apologists for Jesus say it's only for >> a countably infinite number of years, the smallest sort of infinity, but I >> still think that's just a tad too long. >> >> >> >> John K Clark? >> >> >> >> >> >> I?m not an expert on that, but as I understood it, it isn?t Jeesus but >> rather his old man who does the infinite waterboarding, using mixture of >> boiling windex and cat urine, and all such unpleasantness. Jesus was head >> of the pardons department and the virgins, as I vaguely recall. Granted I >> might have them conflated with another religion guy. >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:17:49 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:17:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] book In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> ### Anything that "smashes" the statin hypothesis is complete baloney. >> Statins lower all-cause mortality in specified populations in multiple >> large randomized placebo-controlled trials. This is the end of story. There >> is no "statin hypothesis", there are only statin facts. >> > > Sorry for the delayed reaction, here. > > The "statin hypothesis" is that treating cholesterol above a certain level > with statins is medically recommended. That level has been consistently > lowered over the years. The fact that statins lower all-cause mortality in > specified populations doesn't "prove" the statin hypothesis unless the > specified population is "everyone with cholesterol level over N", which > doesn't seem to be the case. From a quick google, it appears the population > helped is those with non-obstructive coronary artery disease. Lowering > mortality is great, but how much is it lowered and at what cost? Statins > aren't without side effects. > > -Dave > > ?In fact, an entire book has been written, by a physician, about the > cognitive decline seen in many cases of statin usage.? > _ > ?So I hardly think it can be called baloney. > ?bill w ? > ? > ______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:21:55 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:21:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] distribution of power, was: RE: Brain prosthetic startup In-Reply-To: <018a01d1f8ab$eabc4c80$c034e580$@att.net> References: <018a01d1f8ab$eabc4c80$c034e580$@att.net> Message-ID: We brought these problems on ourselves. spike ?Ah - quoting the famous philosopher Pogo, eh? Changes such as you suggest would take a president and a Congress of the same party, but I think that would result in more, not less, power of the president. They only want to castrate the other guys. bill w? On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:22 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > > > > >?So I propose altering candidates' hormone levels to where the sex > hormones are very low until after the election. (Would Trump have anything > at all to say?) bill w > > > > > > > > Sure that?s a good start. But another reasonable approach would be to > distribute the authority to launch aggressive military action over several > people. Oh wait, someone already thought of that: the framers of the > constitution. > > > > Those guys already realized the danger of allowing one person to make the > call on that, and they did it a long time ago, way before email existed. > They realized that one guy could be bribed, bluffed or blackmailed into > launching a military attack on someone else?s enemy with no benefit to > those having to pay the price for it (not that this has already happened > (recently.)) > > > > Consider this: Franklin Roosevelt was screaming to enter WW2. Congress > told him no. Then when the Japanese hit Pearl, possibly as a result of > being provoked by Roosevelt, congress went along. A decade went by. > Truman wanted to enter the Korean war, congress said no. He ordered > military peacekeepers, who then became warriors. Another decade went by. > Kennedy wanted to enter the Vietnam war, congress said no. Following > Truman?s precedent, he sent peacekeepers. They became warriors. Johnson > escalated it, again without congressional approval. > > > > Now, with the nukes being controlled by the executive branch, and all > armed conflicts redefined as peacekeeping or regime change, we effectively > handed over the authority to wage war to the executive branch and made the > legislative branch nearly irrelevant. So here we are in the position from > which the framers of the constitution protected us and we defeated. > Natural result: America is in a virtual civil war over a question that > shouldn?t be all that important: who will be president. Reason: that > office was never designed to carry all the power it has. > > > > Since we tack on all this extra power to that office, it makes that office > attractive to power grabbers and power abusers. Note that both major > candidates are power grabbers and power abusers. Does this surprise us? > Why? We have a guy who is spending millions of his own money to get a job > which pays a fraction of that amount. Why would he want it? We have a > person who sold government favors for enormous sums, so it is perfectly > clear why she would want access to still more government power. No mystery > there. Of the major party nominees, one has already cashed in on and > abused political power and the other apparently plans to. > > > > Solution: restore that office to the level of authority it was originally > designed for. Get that nuclear goddam football away from that office, put > it where it should have gone to start with: the speaker of the house, with > a panel of about a dozen legislators responsible for it. We don?t need > those things on a hair trigger now. We have instant communications > available for everyone on a proposed nuclear football team, and we have > early warning systems to tell us if an attack is coming, we have sea-based > missiles that cannot be taken out by first strike. Let us make it to where > police action military exercises are restricted to a subset of the > military. > > > > By parking all that power in one office, we have made it far too > attractive to all the wrong kinds of people. We brought these problems on > ourselves. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:50:09 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:50:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 17, 2016 12:17 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert Einstein", New York Times, 25 May 1946) > > Now this quote is interesting: just how does one conceive of a new way of conception? Or did Einstein follow this up with suggestions? Apparently he was soliciting funding for a think tank to develop said new methods. The most complete non-paywalled version of the article I have found so far is at http://www.fredsakaderniet.dk/tid/1900/1946/maj/maj0825.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 19:51:30 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:51:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Aug 17, 2016 12:17 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" > wrote: > > "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move > toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert Einstein", New > York Times, 25 May 1946) > > > > Now this quote is interesting: just how does one conceive of a new way > of conception? Or did Einstein follow this up with suggestions? > > Apparently he was soliciting funding for a think tank to develop said new > methods. The most complete non-paywalled version of the article I have > found so far is at http://www.fredsakaderniet.dk/ > tid/1900/1946/maj/maj0825.htm > That didn't come through right - try this: http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/tid/1900/1946/maj/maj0825.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 19:43:01 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:43:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <022f01d1f8bf$914427e0$b3cc77a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 12:11 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Dave Sill > wrote: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to add to it. I got it but didn't have anything to add. Please stay. :-) -Dave ?Me too. ditto. Yes, - number two. bill w? Ja, same here. Keith on collective human behavior I have little expertise. I am here to learn from guys like you who do have insights on that topic. BillW has expertise in another area in which I would need to learn a bunch of material just to merely suck at that. I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own posts, but I am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which you read, you may understand why I keep talking about hearing the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 20:12:00 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:12:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On 17 August 2016 at 20:01, Adam A. Ford wrote: > According to this article, hell began with Plato, and was adopted into > Christianity ~2nd century AD. I don't think hell was mentioned in the old > testament. > > http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/death/origin-of-hell-fire.php#.V7SvSKJc66w > Not only hell. All the Greek philosophy stuff was added by Paul and his followers. Jesus (maybe) was an itinerant Jewish rabbi who preached in Aramaic to ordinary Jewish people who were all familiar with Judaism and the Old Testament and were looking for a Messiah to rebel against Roman rule. It is patently ridiculous to put complex Greek philosophy into his mouth. But the New Testament was written in Greek for people who knew little about Judaism and were Roman subjects. The Emperor Constantine wanted a religion to keep the people well-behaved, not rebellious. BillK From steinberg.will at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 20:21:05 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:21:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: Regardless of whether Jesus existed, some person or group was responsible for compiling a set of norms and mores that were *extremely* revolutionary for the time, and, if the subject of proper exegeses, are still extremely revolutionary for this time. The teachings of Jesus are all about civil disobedience, nonviolent resistance, unconditional and universal love, etc. Paraphrased, he says stuff like: Don't criticize someone's small flaws until you fix your huge flaws. (Plank/mote line--basically repeated in the casting the first stone bit.) The Torah says love your neighbor, but I say love your enemy too. If someone who perceives themself as in a higher class than you insults you, react in a way such that whether continuing to engage or walking away, they are forced to make actions that imply you are of equal class. He told his followers to be "as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves"--i.e. if you have radical beliefs, act normal and blend in as much as you can. And he went in to the temple and turned over the tables of the money lenders who were putting people into debt in exchange for animals to sacrifice--sort of like a theme park where you have to buy tickets to do anything, or company scrip. The "New Testament" is also a very modernist piece of writing--four parallel versions of the same story with different writing styles and certain divergences. Ancient spiritual literature is BRIMMING with legitimate and very interesting moral, philosophical, and metaphysical ideas. If you'll remember, science emerged from natural philosophy, which emerged from spiritual doctrines--they were the only information compilations addressing what the sciences address today. It's so pass? to trash religion. Obviously there are idiots who are fundamentalists, who are too stupid to do deep reads and interpretation of their bibles, but it's just as idiotic to forge long diatribes against those people who aren't representative of religion at all. The kind of stuff people like Dawkins write is as if I wrote a piece criticizing science because of Dr. Mengele. Dawkins is a great science writer and a joke of a philosopher. Sorry I guess that's off topic. Hell is a stupid concept. When you did your mind is split into millions of individual thought strands that travel tangent to their dual or resolution and are "reincarnated" memetically in new or extant minds in search of their own karmic resolution (dialectical materialism). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rex at nosyntax.net Wed Aug 17 20:51:03 2016 From: rex at nosyntax.net (rex) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:51:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20160817205103.GA8654@nosyntax.net> William Flynn Wallace [2016-08-17 12:12]: > Actually, if you want a discussion about irrationality with this > psychologist, you can have one any time, but be prepared for ARistotle, > Plato, Freud, Jung, Adler, Pinker et alia.? The word 'strategy' seems a > bit odd.? That is, if one can recognize that a rational strategy and an > irrational strategy exists, why would pick the irrational?? Or is that > your question? Because "free will" is an adaptive illusion? Or, "irrational" depends upon the assumptions (AKA postulates). Suitably change the assumptions and voila, the irrational strategy becomes a rational strategy. -rex -- "Mild autism can give you a genius like [Albert] Einstein. If you have severe autism, you could remain nonverbal. You don't want people to be on the severe end of the spectrum. But if you got rid of all the autism genetics, you wouldn't have science or art. All you would have is a bunch of social 'yak yaks.'" -- Temple Grandin. From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 20:57:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:57:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question References: Message-ID: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] >?I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own posts, but I am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which you read, you may understand why I keep talking about hearing the footsteps?spike I decided to go ahead and explain some things. When I was a young controls engineer just starting out my career, I went to work for a company that did anti-crime technology, which sounded really cool, but had very little funding or market, so I was assigned as a TDY over to support a USNavy effort while they tried to sell these early 80s remote controlled flying camera drones (!) We sold zero point zero of the RC cams, and I ended up working with the Navy full time for the next several years. I was in an engineering society in 1985. We had a keynote speaker who I will never forget. He was introduced as a retired Boeing engineer who became an engineering professor at one of the local schools, then retired from that. But he explained in his crisp German accent, that wasn?t how he started. He went to work in 1936 just out of the university for an aircraft company in Augsburg Germany, as a structural engineer on the team led by Willy Messerschmitt. The war came along; he and his colleagues were busy developing war technology, particularly a plane designed around the anticipated jet engine. They had no particular political ideology in general; they were engineers and scientists, the math geeks of the day. So they came up with a plane and had built some prototypes of the Me262, began testing them with those marvelous jet engines. Since that plane was the fastest thing in the air, there was little reason to think anything would be coming up from behind. So the engineers designed the 262 as a fighter plane, but it could carry bombs aft. During this time, which was already way into the war, they got orders from Berlin asking them to see what engineering changes would be needed to use the 262 as a bomber. It is difficult to retrofit a fighter as a bomber however, for several reasons. The tactic used by the allies to fight an ME262 was a head-on guns-ablazin? joust. The allies already knew the Kraut had the option of just shoving the throttles forward and getting out of town; they couldn?t catch it. So? head-on attacks. The German engineers anticipated this (as German engineers do) and had armor up front with a long slopey nose up there, so that a bullet hitting at an oblique angle would likely be deflected. They put the guns up there too, so that if facing a head-on barrage, the guns would keep firing. It was one hell of a flying weapon. By this time, British bombs began falling on London, and the orders came in to study a bomber version of the ME262, so they did, but soon found out that the expendable parts were all forward. Removing them would make the aircraft so tail-heavy, most of the weight would need to be replaced with useless ballast. The existing ballast mount was structurally insufficient for the amount needed to rebalance, so they (being clever German engineers) found a way to shorten the tail, reduce aerodynamic surface area which reduced its maneuverability, increase the capacity of the bomb bay which put even more weight aft, and so on, but when they were finished, the plane had some big problems: the armor around the pilot was now easily penetrable from any direction, he had little defense in a head-on attack. All he could do was run away quickly in an air battle. The engineering team made a report that the ME262 couldn?t be effectively retrofitted as a bomber. ?Fortunately, Herr Hitler was an idiot.? (His words, not mine, hard to forget after these three decades. They received word that Der Fuhrer was coming to the factory. They assumed he was coming to give them a pep talk on their work, but when the haggard Fuhrer showed up, he gave no speeches, but rather asked to see the jet fighter, and began asking technical questions, specifically: how much does that armor around the pilot weigh, and what do those guns weigh. When they told him, he ordered that it be removed, that the lowered weight be replaced with every bomb they could get aboard the aircraft, even if it had to be carried externally (which that aircraft was never designed to do and was poorly suited for the task.) They tried to explain the notion of balance and how removing a thousand kg of armor might only allow a hundred kg of extra bombs. But he did come there to listen, he came there to issue orders. He wanted to make a 1940s version of a stealth bomber, which would take off from a forward base in France, fly across the channel all alone, unarmored and unarmed except for the bombs, drop the ordnance over London and fly back. Everything about that plane was wrong for that mission. Hitler was accustomed to hearing Ja vol, heil Hitler, and guys jumping to it. He didn?t ask for anyone to point out the insanity of the plan. But the young engineers realized that if der Fuhrer was issuing crazy nonsensical orders to his premier aircraft designers and not listening to their logical objections, he was doing likewise up, down and across the entire military. He and at least three others concluded that Hitler was crazy, stupid, completely blinded by having arbitrary power, or perhaps all of these, and that the war was lost. This was in 1943. He decided to try to escape. He and one other guy somehow made it to Switzerland where they waited out the war, and later he ended up in the USA, working on passenger airliners for Boeing. During his talk, one of the most memorable things was the emotion in this man?s voice. He spoke of waking up and realizing to his horror that he was working for the bad guys. So overwhelming was this feeling that he chose to leave his family, his childhood friends, colleagues, everything he had grown to know and love, take a huge risk of getting killed; to not work for the bad guys. Any American who works in, with or for the military knows what an awesome force is at our disposal, and why it is that military discipline is taken so very seriously. We know that power corrupts, and the military wields astonishing power. It isn?t a game. I am not even talking about the nukes; I have very little firsthand knowledge of that world, never worked in it. I mean the appalling destructive power of the conventional military. If the US military decides to destroy something, it can make that happen, and it will stay destroyed. I have been out of that world for several years now, but? I am getting that dreaded feeling right now. I woke up one day in the spring of this year realizing that regardless of which of the major political parties prevails in November, we will be led by the bad guys. We are a nation of astonishing, appalling military might, and we are about to choose between leaders who we do not trust with all that power. Even followers of either of the two majors will sheepishly admit they are not big fans of their party?s leader, but the other one is worse. Still, plenty of us will openly admit that these are both very bad choices. If you read that story, you understand better where I am, and why I am getting the dreaded feeling described by my German colleague, of having worked for the bad guys. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 21:24:20 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:24:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:54 PM, spike wrote: > I?m not an expert on that, but as I understood it, it isn?t Jeesus but > rather his old man who does the infinite waterboarding, using mixture of > boiling windex and cat urine, and all such unpleasantness. Jesus was head > of the pardons department and the virgins, as I vaguely recall. Granted I > might have them conflated with another religion guy. > ?In the old man's administration during the Old Testament ? Yahweh ? proved himself to be a total bastard but at least once He killed you He was done fucking with you, however when Junior took oven in the New Testament He instituted a change in policy. These are the words of Jesus, the Prince Of Peace, on the subject: ? * Matthew 23:33* " *You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell??"?* *Matthew 13:42 * ?"*E?* *very cause of sin and all who practice lawlessness? will ?be ?throw?n? into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth*. ?"? *Matthew 25:44-46* ?"?T *hey will go away to eternal punishment* *?*"? *Matthew 25:41* ?"? *Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels* *?*"? *Matthew 18:8* ?*"?* *It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire*.? *Matthew 10:34* " *Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.? For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law? ?*" ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 21:44:01 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:44:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: I Googled it and did not find it. But I remember a project that experts were going to perform that divided the sayings of Jesus into those he very likely said and those that were very questionable. Does anyone know of this? Certainly the sayings John quoted below don't really square with Jesus' ideas about forgiveness ('unto seven times seventy'). bill w On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:24 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:54 PM, spike wrote: > > > > I?m not an expert on that, but as I understood it, it isn?t Jeesus but >> rather his old man who does the infinite waterboarding, using mixture of >> boiling windex and cat urine, and all such unpleasantness. Jesus was head >> of the pardons department and the virgins, as I vaguely recall. Granted I >> might have them conflated with another religion guy. >> > > ?In the old man's administration during the Old Testament ? > Yahweh > ? proved himself to be a total bastard but at least once He killed you He > was done fucking with you, however when Junior took oven in the New > Testament He instituted a change in policy. These are the words of Jesus, > the Prince Of Peace, on the subject: ? > > * Matthew 23:33* > " > *You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to > hell??"?* > > *Matthew 13:42 * > ?"*E?* > *very cause of sin and all who practice lawlessness? will ?be > ?throw?n? into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and > gnashing of teeth*. > ?"? > > *Matthew 25:44-46* > > ?"?T > *hey will go away to eternal punishment* > *?*"? > > > *Matthew 25:41* > ?"? > *Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil > and his angels* > *?*"? > > > *Matthew 18:8* > ?*"?* > *It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two > hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire*.? > > *Matthew 10:34* > " > *Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to > bring peace, but a sword.? For I am come to set a man at variance against > his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law > against her mother in law? ?*" > ? > > John K Clark? > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 21:49:43 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:49:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] candidates and psychopathy Message-ID: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/of-psychopaths-and-presidential-candidates/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 All highly speculative, of course. I said I was going to stop this, but this article will interest many of you, I am sure. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 21:55:09 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:55:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] link Message-ID: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/20-big-questions-about-the-future-of-humanity/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 Take a look at #8. If sperm and ova can be made from skin cells, someone could collect some of yours and produce a baby that is indistinguishable from your own children. Should this be illegal? Related idea: do you own your DNA? Some other answers are interesting as well. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 22:34:52 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 23:34:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On 17 August 2016 at 22:44, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I Googled it and did not find it. But I remember a project that experts > were going to perform that divided the sayings of Jesus into those he very > likely said and those that were very questionable. > > Does anyone know of this? Certainly the sayings John quoted below don't > really square with Jesus' ideas about forgiveness ('unto seven times > seventy'). > That's the Jesus Seminar. BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 17 22:25:24 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:25:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] candidates and psychopathy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <004a01d1f8d6$405ecee0$c11c6ca0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 2:50 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] candidates and psychopathy http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/of-psychopaths-and-presidential-candidates/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 All highly speculative, of course. I said I was going to stop this, but this article will interest many of you, I am sure. bill w No worries BillW. This nightmare of an election season will be over in three months. Then we get to wake up to a new and worse nightmare. In that link you sent, notice the scores of Bernie Sanders. Note that he is in the same neighborhood as George Washington and Margaret Thatcher, Lincoln, Ghandi. Now compare with the others, who fit with Idi Amin, Adolph Hitler, Henry VIII and that distasteful neighborhood. And then note that Sanders? party cheated to hand the nomination to his competitor. Then when caught by hackers, they apologize (sort of (weakly)) fire three conspirators, compare the hacking to the Watergate burglary? then let the result stand. They wonder why they are accused in advance of cheating in the main event. Then ponder that it never seems to cross the mind of the researcher to have Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in the study, who will be on the ballot in every state, rather than Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders, who will be on none of them. Please sir, what is wrong with this picture? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 22:42:47 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 23:42:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On 17 August 2016 at 23:34, BillK wrote: > On 17 August 2016 at 22:44, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> I Googled it and did not find it. But I remember a project that experts >> were going to perform that divided the sayings of Jesus into those he very >> likely said and those that were very questionable. >> >> Does anyone know of this? Certainly the sayings John quoted below don't >> really square with Jesus' ideas about forgiveness ('unto seven times >> seventy'). >> > > That's the Jesus Seminar. > > Another site discussing The Authentic Sayings of Jesus of Nazareth (from the Jesus Seminar). BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 23:15:18 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 19:15:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 PM, Keith Henson wrote: ?> ? > Recently made a post that started with "Irrational is not an easy > strategy to understand." > No replies at all. > ?Irrational behavior means having no reason, no cause, for that behavior, it would be equivalent to random behavior. So putting on a suicide dynamite vest is not irrational ?it's just stupid; he did it for a reason, he did it because he read in a book that a invisible man in the sky will give him 77 virgins after he dies if he puts on that vest. It's stupid for believing what that book says is true so you might then ask why stupidity exists, but as stupidity is the default assumption a much better question would be why intelligence exists. There can only be one answer to that, Evolution. John K Clark > > There are two reasons for that. > > One is that the post went right over everyone's head. > > Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to > add to it. > > If it was the first, I should find another news group. > > Best wishes, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Aug 17 23:44:51 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:44:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:15 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > ?> ? >> Recently made a post that started with "Irrational is not an easy >> strategy to understand." >> No replies at all. >> > > ?Irrational behavior means having no reason, no cause, for that behavior, > it would be equivalent to random behavior. So putting on a suicide dynamite > vest is not irrational ?it's just stupid; he did it for a reason, he did it > because he read in a book that a invisible man in the sky will give him 77 > virgins after he dies if he puts on that vest. It's stupid for believing > what that book says is true so you might then ask why stupidity exists, but > as stupidity is the default assumption a much better question would be why > intelligence exists. There can only be one answer to that, Evolution. > > John K Clark > > ?Problems with word definitions. Irrational could be viewed as against reason, rather than without reason, meaning that a rational reason for something could exist but the person acted against it. That, to me, is the meaning of 'stupid' - knowing better but not doing better, as evidenced by 'Why in the world did I do that? I knew better." This contrasts with 'ignorant', which is simply not knowing. So a stupid mistake means that the person knew better, whereas an ignorant mistake means that he did not know.? > > ?Presumably no one sets out to be irrational in the senses we are > discussing. Ditto stupid. ? > > ?No matter how irrational a religious belief seems to us, it is rational > to the person who holds it. That is, unless you believe that empiricism > holds sway over rationalism or authoritarianism in every instance. (as I > do) So you would think that if there is no hard evidence for it, the it > cannot be believed as real. There are, of course, defensible alternatives > to hard materialism. > ?And it doesn't have to be religious: we have had the hottest July on record.? ? And some will still deny global warming, perhaps because they heard that some scientists don't believe it, and some that do fudged their data, and so on. This is rational even if we think it's misguided - they are believing the wrong experts (just as we are believing the right ones!). bill w? > ? > > > > > >> >> There are two reasons for that. >> >> One is that the post went right over everyone's head. >> >> Second was that it was so clear that nobody could think of anything to >> add to it. >> >> If it was the first, I should find another news group. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 00:19:44 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:19:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:51 PM, rex wrote: > Or, "irrational" depends upon the assumptions (AKA postulates). Suitably change > the assumptions and voila, the irrational strategy becomes a rational strategy. The point, perhaps inadequately stated, is that evolution has wired up humans to behave irrationally in circumstances where acting irrationally has benefited the genes over a long time. It's an example of "rational" diverging between the individual humans and their genes. Genes are in the game long term, so it should not be that surprising that they build minds which go irrational when it benefits the genes to do so. If you want apply this to present or historical examples, be my guest. Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 00:26:26 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:26:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Tabby's star and the mainstream Message-ID: http://www.chattanoogapulse.com/columns/just-a-theory/this-could-be-big-astronomically-big/ Keith From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 00:38:24 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:38:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:44 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > ?> ? > I remember a project that experts were going to perform that divided the > sayings of Jesus into those he very likely said > ?I wouldn't even say Jesus very likely existed. I think it's likely that a man named Jesus who did a few of the non magical things in bible existed, likely but not very likely. ? > ?> ? > ?a? > nd those that were very questionable. It's ? questionable ? that Jesus said anything at all, it's not ? questionable ? that the character "Jesus" in the Bible said some despicable things. I'll give the old Testament God one thing ?,? Yahweh ? was consistent, everything He said was repulsive. Yahweh's kid is different, on a good day he can actually say some nice morally uplifting things, be when He gets in a bad mood He's far worse than His daddy. What could be more evil that torturing somebody (even Hitler) for eternity? John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 00:30:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:30:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Tabby's star and the mainstream In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006301d1f8e7$b2cba780$1862f680$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Keith Henson Subject: [ExI] Tabby's star and the mainstream http://www.chattanoogapulse.com/columns/just-a-theory/this-could-be-big-astr onomically-big/ Keith _______________________________________________ SETI has regular lectures over at the Microsloth campus in Mountain View. Last week we had an excellent lecture on Tabby's star by an astronomer from Berkeley. He really has me turned on (about Tabby's star I meant.) He went over the traditional models used to explain what we are seeing; none of them fit very well. Stay tuned! spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 00:59:29 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:59:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 , Keith Henson wrote: > ?> ? > The point, perhaps inadequately stated, is that evolution has wired up > humans to behave irrationally in circumstances where acting > irrationally has benefited the genes over a long time. > ?The only reason I like science and rationality in general is that it works, but i f irrational behavior works better than rational behavior then why be rational? ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 01:55:40 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:55:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] link In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:55 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/20-big-questions- > about-the-future-of-humanity/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 > > Take a look at #8. If sperm and ova can be made from skin cells, someone > could collect some of yours and produce a baby that is indistinguishable > from your own children. Should this be illegal? > If done without the genetic parent's consent, it is arguably illegal under existing laws. if done with the consent of all genetic parents, I see no more justification for outlawing this than for outlawing, say, in vitro fertilization. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 01:57:39 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:57:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:59 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 , Keith Henson wrote: > >> The point, perhaps inadequately stated, is that evolution has wired up >> humans to behave irrationally in circumstances where acting >> irrationally has benefited the genes over a long time. > > The only reason I like science and rationality in general is that it works, > but if irrational behavior works better than rational behavior then why be > rational? In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good strategy most of the time. Acting irrationally or stupidly and following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by anticipation of a bleak future. Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word anticipate a bleak future. Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. Is it possible to break out of this mode? I don't know, but it seems unlikely if we don't understand how humans came to be wired up this way. Keith From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 14:01:39 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:01:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I still have problems with word definitions: if 'irrational' behavior works better than 'rational' behavior, then it is rational. Perhaps we need to define rational as well as irrational. It simply makes no sense to me to say'it is rational to act irrationally'. This is oxymoronic. bill w On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:59 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 , Keith Henson wrote: > > > >> The point, perhaps inadequately stated, is that evolution has wired up > >> humans to behave irrationally in circumstances where acting > >> irrationally has benefited the genes over a long time. > > > > The only reason I like science and rationality in general is that it > works, > > but if irrational behavior works better than rational behavior then why > be > > rational? > > In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, > it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act > irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from > the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good > strategy most of the time. Acting irrationally or stupidly and > following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by > anticipation of a bleak future. > > Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word > anticipate a bleak future. > > Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. > > Is it possible to break out of this mode? I don't know, but it seems > unlikely if we don't understand how humans came to be wired up this > way. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 14:06:30 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:06:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] link In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:55 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/20-big-questions-a >> bout-the-future-of-humanity/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 >> >> Take a look at #8. If sperm and ova can be made from skin cells, someone >> could collect some of yours and produce a baby that is indistinguishable >> from your own children. Should this be illegal? >> > > If done without the genetic parent's consent, it is arguably illegal under > existing laws. > > if done with the consent of all genetic parents, I see no more > justification for outlawing this than for outlawing, say, in vitro > fertilization. > ?---------- > ?You are right. I was assuming clandestine obtaining of skin cells. What if the persons whose skin cells are used are dead? I can see where this is going - Olympic champions, Nobel prize winners, etc. will be essentially cloned. Could this lead to patents on DNA? bill w? > ? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 14:19:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:19:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <007e01d1f95b$80cbb8f0$82632ad0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 7:02 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question I still have problems with word definitions: if 'irrational' behavior works better than 'rational' behavior, then it is rational. Perhaps we need to define rational as well as irrational. It simply makes no sense to me to say'it is rational to act irrationally'. This is oxymoronic. bill w BillW, our world is filled with this kind of thing, but admitting that the apparently irrational is really rational is a tacit admission that we don?t know everything. In chess, some opening sequences look really weird from the viewpoint of well-understood principals, but centuries of experience has shown the irrational-looking move works better, assuming one continues to follow the strange-looking thread. In controls engineering, we have mathematical tools that few know the scientific reason why they work the way they do; but the engineers aren?t paid to understand the mathematical tools; only use them correctly. For instance, if a structures engineer can stabilize a vibration mode in a satellite using a Nichols chart and a Bode plot, she might have no clue why those work and why they suggest doing something exactly opposite what a rational engineer would do? shrug. She still stabilizes the satellite. When we speak of irrational human behavior, compare it to the game of poker. We know that some irrationality is advantageous. We don?t understand all the subtleties of human behavior. We are not even close: the brain does not understand the brain. Keith is an example of a person who suffered severe penalties for having insights into human behavior. Not only do we not understand rational behavior, society doesn?t even want it. Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 14:45:14 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:45:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] link In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <439ECEF1-183A-4251-B675-C517834AEE1A@gmail.com> On Aug 18, 2016, at 7:06 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > What if the persons whose skin cells are used are dead? I can see where this is going - Olympic champions, Nobel prize winners, etc. will be essentially cloned. Could this lead to patents on DNA? In the US, federal law would have to be changed to abrogate the 02013 SCOTUS decision on this very issue: http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/gene-patent-decision-in-plain-english/ Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 14:35:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:35:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] chinese to test robo-taxis Message-ID: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> Cool, they are going to test a self-driving taxi: http://www.wsj.com/articles/volvo-uber-to-jointly-develop-autonomous-sport-u tility-vehicles-1471518577 I am annoyed that they are using Chinese cars as a platform, but I will get over it. China probably has a fairly similar problem to the states: drunkard is in no condition to drive at 0200 when the bar closes, could call a taxi, but if so, faces the risk the driver could take advantage of her in that condition. China has four times the number of people, so it stands to reason they would have four times the number of drunks needing a safe ride home. Economies of scale make things happen. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 15:04:37 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:04:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] chinese to test robo-taxis In-Reply-To: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> References: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 18, 2016, at 7:35 AM, spike wrote: > Cool, they are going to test a self-driving taxi: > > http://www.wsj.com/articles/volvo-uber-to-jointly-develop-autonomous-sport-utility-vehicles-1471518577 > > I am annoyed that they are using Chinese cars as a platform, but I will get over it. China probably has a fairly similar problem to the states: drunkard is in no condition to drive at 0200 when the bar closes, could call a taxi, but if so, faces the risk the driver could take advantage of her in that condition. China has four times the number of people, so it stands to reason they would have four times the number of drunks needing a safe ride home. Economies of scale make things happen. I'm not sure the rate of drunkenness is the same for both nations, so not sure if China has four times the number as the US. In fact, according to this, alcohol consumption is China was about a third lower (not surprising to me) than in the US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_consumption_per_capita (Note that India's rate is about half the US's.) How does this map onto how many people might get drunk and might get drunk and need a cab home? Not sure. Anyhow, I'm happy to see someone trying this out. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 15:06:41 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:06:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This discussion reminds me of Caplan's concept of rational irrationality: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_irrationality Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Aug 17 21:39:59 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 22:39:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Einstein's think tank In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: <3598d8c9-bddc-0ba6-baba-3951e052863e@aleph.se> Ah, these guys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Committee_of_Atomic_Scientists Disbanded after 4 years, but was apparently the seed for Pugwash: https://pugwash.org/ - note their slogan. IMHO, Einstein's reputation as a great thinker on all matters is largely due to the halo effect. He was a smart nice guy using his reputation and contacts to promote good causes, but I have not seen any truly brilliant insights in peace policy or similar fields from him. He was way better as a physicist than as a philosopher. Overall, calling for new and better ways of thinking is much easier than doing them. List alumnus Yudkowsky has done a better job than most, but I think even he and the most hardcore LessWrongers would admit they have just polished and mildly improved existing rationality tools. Most people claiming to have found a fundamentally better way of thinking tend to be full of hot air and/or delusion [especially the later if they also talk about consciousness ;-) ]. Still, pushing for new cognitive abilities or better solutions to our collective game theory (possibly computer aided) is worth doing - it is terribly hard, but the rewards of even a slight improvement can be pretty big. On 2016-08-17 20:51, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Adrian Tymes > wrote: > > On Aug 17, 2016 12:17 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" > > wrote: > > "A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive > and move toward higher levels." ("Atomic Education Urged by Albert > Einstein", New York Times, 25 May 1946) > > > > Now this quote is interesting: just how does one conceive of a > new way of conception? Or did Einstein follow this up with > suggestions? > > Apparently he was soliciting funding for a think tank to develop > said new methods. The most complete non-paywalled version of the > article I have found so far is at > http://www.fredsakaderniet.dk/tid/1900/1946/maj/maj0825.htm > > > > That didn't come through right - try this: > http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/tid/1900/1946/maj/maj0825.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 15:48:41 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:48:41 +0100 Subject: [ExI] chinese to test robo-taxis In-Reply-To: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> References: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 18 August 2016 at 15:35, spike wrote: > > Cool, they are going to test a self-driving taxi: > > http://www.wsj.com/articles/volvo-uber-to-jointly-develop-autonomous-sport-utility-vehicles-1471518577 > > I am annoyed that they are using Chinese cars as a platform, but I will get > over it. China probably has a fairly similar problem to the states: > drunkard is in no condition to drive at 0200 when the bar closes, could call > a taxi, but if so, faces the risk the driver could take advantage of her in > that condition. China has four times the number of people, so it stands to > reason they would have four times the number of drunks needing a safe ride > home. Economies of scale make things happen. > Uber is starting self-driving taxis *this month* in Pittsburg. Quote: Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Uber?s Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver?s seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. ------- USA drunkards get to be the first! :) BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:17:43 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:17:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: I'll give the old Testament God one thing ?,? Yahweh ? was consistent, everything He said was repulsive. john I've been Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian and Methodist along the way and not one of them spend much time at all with Old Testament teachings or issues. It's sort of an embarrassment to them, I think. So much clashes with their God Is Love teachings. I look upon the Bible as a sort of 'theory of the personality of God' thing. And that theory changes dramatically from Old the New. bill w On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 7:38 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:44 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> ?> ? >> I remember a project that experts were going to perform that divided the >> sayings of Jesus into those he very likely said >> > > ?I wouldn't even say Jesus very likely existed. I think it's likely that a > man named Jesus who did a few of the non magical things in bible existed, > likely but not very likely. ? > > > >> ?> ? >> ?a? >> nd those that were very questionable. > > > It's > ? > questionable > ? > that Jesus said anything at all, it's not > ? > questionable > ? > that the character "Jesus" in the Bible said some despicable things. I'll > give the old Testament God one thing > ?,? > Yahweh > ? was consistent, everything He said was repulsive. Yahweh's kid is > different, on a good day he can actually say some nice morally uplifting > things, be when He gets in a bad mood He's far worse than His daddy. What > could be more evil that torturing somebody (even Hitler) for eternity? > > John K Clark ? > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:23:16 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:23:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] candidates and psychopathy In-Reply-To: <004a01d1f8d6$405ecee0$c11c6ca0$@att.net> References: <004a01d1f8d6$405ecee0$c11c6ca0$@att.net> Message-ID: Then ponder that it never seems to cross the mind of the researcher to have Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in the study, who will be on the ballot in every state, rather than Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders, who will be on none of them. Please sir, what is wrong with this picture? *spike* *You know. Lots of things. For one, they probably had little info on Johnson and Stein. For another, the two party system. For another, both parties are corrupt, and what do you expect when hundreds of millions of dollars are donated? In MS you can spend your unused contributions any way you want (and laws to limit this failed in the legislature this year). For another, the campaign trail is way way too long. Many of us were sick of it many months ago. Let's adopt the British system. * *bill w* On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:25 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2016 2:50 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* [ExI] candidates and psychopathy > > > > http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/of-psychopaths-and- > presidential-candidates/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20160817 > > > > All highly speculative, of course. I said I was going to stop this, but > this article will interest many of you, I am sure. > > > > bill w > > > > > > No worries BillW. This nightmare of an election season will be over in > three months. Then we get to wake up to a new and worse nightmare. > > > > In that link you sent, notice the scores of Bernie Sanders. Note that he > is in the same neighborhood as George Washington and Margaret Thatcher, > Lincoln, Ghandi. Now compare with the others, who fit with Idi Amin, > Adolph Hitler, Henry VIII and that distasteful neighborhood. And then note > that Sanders? party cheated to hand the nomination to his competitor. Then > when caught by hackers, they apologize (sort of (weakly)) fire three > conspirators, compare the hacking to the Watergate burglary? then let the > result stand. They wonder why they are accused in advance of cheating in > the main event. > > > > Then ponder that it never seems to cross the mind of the researcher to > have Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in the study, who will be on the ballot in > every state, rather than Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders, who will be on none > of them. > > > > Please sir, what is wrong with this picture? > > > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:30:43 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:30:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bill, the "better" problem stems from there being two viewpoints, the individual humans and human genes. Humans frequently take actions that, if viewed only from their personal viewpoint are not rational. But from the viewpoint of genes, the actions make sense. See Hamilton and Haldane, "two brothers or eight cousins." So to restate your closing line, "it is sometimes rational from the genes viewpoint for genes to build brain mechanisms that induce humans to act irrationally from their individual viewpoints." Millions of years of genetic selection have left humans with behavioral mechanisms that lie behind such things as suicide bombers. Least you deplore this too much, it is worth remembering Thermopylae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae. The accomplishments of the Greeks lie at the root of Western culture. Our history would have been very different without the suicidal self sacrifice of King Leonidas of Sparta and his men. Keith Best wishes, Keith On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:01 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I still have problems with word definitions: if 'irrational' behavior works > better than 'rational' behavior, then it is rational. Perhaps we need to > define rational as well as irrational. > > It simply makes no sense to me to say'it is rational to act irrationally'. > This is oxymoronic. > > bill w > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:59 PM, John Clark wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 , Keith Henson wrote: >> > >> >> The point, perhaps inadequately stated, is that evolution has wired up >> >> humans to behave irrationally in circumstances where acting >> >> irrationally has benefited the genes over a long time. >> > >> > The only reason I like science and rationality in general is that it >> > works, >> > but if irrational behavior works better than rational behavior then why >> > be >> > rational? >> >> In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, >> it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act >> irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from >> the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good >> strategy most of the time. Acting irrationally or stupidly and >> following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by >> anticipation of a bleak future. >> >> Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word >> anticipate a bleak future. >> >> Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. >> >> Is it possible to break out of this mode? I don't know, but it seems >> unlikely if we don't understand how humans came to be wired up this >> way. >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:32:04 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:32:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike Weight in on this Anders - please? I think if one cannot define a word one should not use it. On Match.com, which I was on a few years ago, I had to pick: Religious, Spiritual but not Religious, neither Spiritual nor Religious. I picked the second one but cannot to this day say what Spiritual means. I just did not want to severely limit my matches. But I do not use words that if I were asked I could not define to my satisfaction. So, for ex., I do not use these words: intuition, instinct, spiritual. (as for your engineers, I would think that 'whatever works' is rational and whatever doesn't, despite theory, first impression, or expert opinion to the contrary, is irrational) bill w On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > This discussion reminds me of Caplan's concept of rational irrationality: > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_irrationality > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 16:21:45 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:21:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] chinese to test robo-taxis In-Reply-To: References: <008801d1f95d$c43cf8e0$4cb6eaa0$@att.net> Message-ID: <012101d1f96c$9da7a950$d8f6fbf0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 8:49 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] chinese to test robo-taxis On 18 August 2016 at 15:35, spike wrote: > > Cool, they are going to test a self-driving taxi: > > http://www.wsj.com/articles/volvo-uber-to-jointly-develop-autonomous-s > port-utility-vehicles-1471518577 > > I am annoyed that they are using Chinese cars as a platform... China has four times the number > of people, so it stands to reason they would have four times the > number of drunks needing a safe ride home. Economies of scale make things happen. > Uber is starting self-driving taxis *this month* in Pittsburg. Quote: >...Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Uber?s Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver?s seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. ------- >...USA drunkards get to be the first! :) BillK _______________________________________________ Ja, is this cool or what? I already heard a local company is trying to start up in Mountain View based on the Stanford/Google team to compete with Carnegie Mellon. Go cardinal! We can take 'em! This raises a pile of new and interesting questions, starting with the liability dilemma of steering-wheel vs no-steering-wheel self-drivers. As I understood it, the first category, the one which has been under test around Google for the last several years, requires a licensed and presumed sober operator behind the wheel, but this taxi does not. Therefor... Uber and perhaps Volvo accept the liability. Next, we have the problem of what happens when a self-driver gets into an accident under the circumstances where it is clear the accident was caused by humans, perhaps intentionally? The self-driver has the burden of proof, and even then... I would think the odds are stacked against it steeply. Reason: the defendant is deep-pockets China. In US civil court, the one with the most money loses. Next. It is easy enough to see that self-drivers are a waaaay better deal than human drivers for a multitude of reasons. The self-driver will not rob or rape a passenger, they won't gossip around town if they took the local Methodist minister home drunk, that sorta thing. OK so that displaces a bunch of taxi drivers, particularly human Uber drivers, many of whom may not be able to get jobs aaaaaanywhere; they might be convicted felons for instance. OK then, how hard would it be for an unemployed Uber driver to call up a self-driving taxi, ride it to the home of her cheating boyfriend's girlfriend, then barf in the car just before getting out? Or leave behind a pile of shit on the seat? She gets revenge on Volvo while shifting the blame onto her competitor. Next. We can easily imagine a neighborhood where a self-driving taxi would work out just fine: the people there have good jobs, no one would take a taxi job there even if it is available, and so forth. Come on, you can picture what I am talking about. Now consider the counterpart, those areas where there are a lot of people out of work, a lot of people struggling, dangerous places where the locals burn businesses for no clear reason. Those self-driving taxi companies will not go there: too risky. Then you have a case where the good neighborhood drunks ride home inexpensively, safely and discretely, but in the bad neighborhood, even human-operated taxis don't want to go there because it is too risky. The drunks there attempt to drive themselves home, get arrested. Alternate scenario: drunk calls taxi, bad guy sees her stumble out of bar, follows self-driver to her home, drunkard gets out, bad guy goes to work, no human witnesses. We completely foresaw the consequences of Uber: the drivers can themselves be criminals. Happened already. Now we can easily see some really big problems coming with self-driving taxis. They are coming anyway. Societal problems are Hydra-headed beasts, and technology is Hercules' sword. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:45:53 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:45:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump In-Reply-To: References: <014a01d1f8a8$13a79900$3af6cb00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:17 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > ?>? > So much clashes with their God Is Love teachings. I look upon the Bible > as a sort of 'theory of the personality of God' thing. And that theory > changes dramatically from Old the New. ?A few things may have changed a bit from the old to the new testament, but I wouldn't call the change ?s? ? ? dramatic. I said it before I'll say it again, nothing ?is more evil than torturing somebody for eternity ?, and that was Jesus's idea not His Dad's. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:49:15 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:49:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 18 August 2016 at 17:30, Keith Henson wrote: > Humans frequently take actions that, if viewed only from their > personal viewpoint are not rational. But from the viewpoint of genes, > the actions make sense. See Hamilton and Haldane, "two brothers or > eight cousins." > > So to restate your closing line, "it is sometimes rational from the > genes viewpoint for genes to build brain mechanisms that induce humans > to act irrationally from their individual viewpoints." > > Millions of years of genetic selection have left humans with > behavioral mechanisms that lie behind such things as suicide bombers. > > Least you deplore this too much, it is worth remembering Thermopylae > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae. The > accomplishments of the Greeks lie at the root of Western culture. Our > history would have been very different without the suicidal self > sacrifice of King Leonidas of Sparta and his men. > And you can add in that even when humans think they are being rational, they're not. Human thinking is driven by emotion, brain cludges, wrong beliefs, logical fallacies, etc. Humans are not rational. BillK From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 16:53:19 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:53:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] link In-Reply-To: <439ECEF1-183A-4251-B675-C517834AEE1A@gmail.com> References: <439ECEF1-183A-4251-B675-C517834AEE1A@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Aug 18, 2016 7:46 AM, "Dan TheBookMan" wrote: > On Aug 18, 2016, at 7:06 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> What if the persons whose skin cells are used are dead? I can see where this is going - Olympic champions, Nobel prize winners, etc. will be essentially cloned. Could this lead to patents on DNA? > > In the US, federal law would have to be changed to abrogate the 02013 SCOTUS decision on this very issue: > > http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/gene-patent-decision-in-plain-english/ Copyright law might be more appropriate anyway. Nucleotides are essentially letters, and English is not the only form of putting symbols in sequences that can be copyrighted. Notice that computer code can be copyrighted, even if it is also functional. That said, there would be arguments as to who did the composition: the donor, or the donor's parents. There are also laws against desecrating corpses; taking DNA without the consent of the deceased's estate would probably count. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 16:41:57 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:41:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <014501d1f96f$6facb290$4f0617b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 9:32 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike Weight in on this Anders - please? I think if one cannot define a word one should not use it. ? (as for your engineers, I would think that 'whatever works' is rational and whatever doesn't, despite theory, first impression, or expert opinion to the contrary, is irrational) bill w Ja. In human experience, we have our individual-level reasoning, our family-level reasoning, our neighborhood-level, our national level and so forth. Keith has pointed out there is genetic-similarity based reasoning. So the distinction of rational vs irrational is based on which level or meta-level it is based. Regarding the use of terms, we must recognize that the distinction between rational and irrational is difficult to define when dealing with human behavior. Use them sparingly and with due caution. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 18:00:17 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:00:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:49 AM, BillK wrote: snip > > And you can add in that even when humans think they are being > rational, they're not. You can make a case that more human mental effort is expended on rationalizing than on rational thinking. > Human thinking is driven by emotion, brain cludges, wrong beliefs, > logical fallacies, etc. At least the emotion drives and brain kludges are the result of genetic selections. "Wrong beliefs" are elements of culture, memes. With effort those can be sorted out. Recent example discussed here is circumcision. Clearly a meme, largely in the religious category. An impressive example of the spread of this meme is the fact that South Korea has an exceptionally high rate, this mutilation meme being passed from US culture of the 50s to the South Koreans. > Humans are not rational. While that's true, most human behavior is fairly rational, especially if you include the long range view of human genes. What we need to understand is conditional behaviors. Battered wife, fraternity hazing, military basic training, and SMBD are diverse and hard to account for until you understand them all as aspects of capture-bonding. In turn, the evolution of the mental mechanisms behind capture-bonding makes sense in the environment in which humans evolved. Keith From anders at aleph.se Thu Aug 18 20:16:38 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:16:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> On 2016-08-18 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike > > > Weight in on this Anders - please? > Huh? I thought Caplans definition is pretty clear. There is epistemic rationality - trying to believe true things - and instrumental rationality - trying to choose the most effective means to get one's goals. People can fail at these, and then we may say they are irrational. Sometimes we overestimate how much they know or can think, so it can be unfair. Sometimes they have goals we do not fully understand, so we think they are irrational about something while they are actually pretty rational (a lot of economics is about this). Rational irrationality is simply due to having goals that make it instrumentally rational to be epistemically irrational: there is a goal (which is often hidden to outsiders) that is best served by not being too epistemically rational. A philosopher friend told me about her religious mother responding to her probing questions about religion when she was young by saying that she also had that kind of questions, but she decided she was better off not inquiring. That is rational irrationality: the mother benefited (perhaps emotionally) from being religious, and suspected poking too much at her belief foundations would lose the benefit. > > I think if one cannot define a word one should not use it. On > Match.com, which I was on a few years ago, I had to pick: Religious, > Spiritual but not Religious, neither Spiritual nor Religious. I > picked the second one but cannot to this day say what Spiritual > means. I just did not want to severely limit my matches. But I do > not use words that if I were asked I could not define to my > satisfaction. So, for ex., I do not use these words: intuition, > instinct, spiritual. > > > (as for your engineers, I would think that 'whatever works' is > rational and whatever doesn't, despite theory, first impression, or > expert opinion to the contrary, is irrational) > > > bill w > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Dan TheBookMan > wrote: > > This discussion reminds me of Caplan's concept of rational > irrationality: > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_irrationality > > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 20:28:24 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:28:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Keith Henson wrote: ?> ? > Bill, the "better" problem stems from there being two viewpoints, the > ? ? > individual humans and human genes. > ?Yes there can certainly be conflicts between the two: Individual humans = the invention of condoms would be a good idea. Human genes = the invention of condoms would be a bad idea.? But individual humans ended up getting there way because the genome is far too small for anything but extremely generaL orders and the brain can, like good lawyers, can find loopholes in those orders. ?> ? > The > ? ? > accomplishments of the Greeks lie at the root of Western culture. Our > ? ? > history would have been very different without the suicidal self > ? ? > sacrifice of King Leonidas of Sparta and his men. ? True but I can't help but wonder whose genes are more common in the present day gene pool, those that were once in King Leonidas ? ? or those there were in the coward who refused to march with him and instead stayed home and had 10 children. And you may be too pessimistic, ? ? Steven Pinker ? made a strong case in his book "?The Better Angels of Our Nature ?" that there is less violence now that at any other time in history.? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 20:26:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:26:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> References: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> Message-ID: <021001d1f98e$d82fab50$888f01f0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 1:17 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question On 2016-08-18 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike Weight in on this Anders - please? Huh? I thought Caplans definition is pretty clear. There is epistemic rationality - trying to believe true things - and instrumental rationality - trying to choose the most effective means to get one's goals. People can fail at these, and then we may say they are irrational. Ja. BillW, remember the first time you fell crazy in love? Sure you do. We all remember that time, we remember the best time we fell in love. Fortune are those for whom the first time and the best time was the same event. OK now. In light of that experience. Remember all the stunning illogical ways of "thinking" you did, all the silly goofy decisions you made, the things you said, oy vey. My bride holds each of these dear in her memory. It worked out well, all of it. Illogical acts are sometimes perfecly logical, certainly from my son's point of view. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 20:53:20 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:53:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <021001d1f98e$d82fab50$888f01f0$@att.net> References: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> <021001d1f98e$d82fab50$888f01f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4ACACCC2-6BED-4A04-A7C8-A926E34ED680@gmail.com> On Aug 18, 2016, at 1:26 PM, spike wrote: From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 1:17 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question > > On 2016-08-18 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike > > Weight in on this Anders - please? > > Huh? I thought Caplans definition is pretty clear. There is epistemic rationality - trying to believe true things - and instrumental rationality - trying to choose the most effective means to get one's goals. People can fail at these, and then we may say they are irrational? Ja. > > > BillW, remember the first time you fell crazy in love? Sure you do. We all remember that time, we remember the best time we fell in love. Fortune are those for whom the first time and the best time was the same event. > > OK now. In light of that experience? Remember all the stunning illogical ways of ?thinking? you did, all the silly goofy decisions you made, the things you said, oy vey. My bride holds each of these dear in her memory. It worked out well, all of it. Illogical acts are sometimes perfecly logical, certainly from my son?s point of view. I feel you're confusing pleasant and fortunate with logical there. ;) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 22:06:22 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:06:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] link In-Reply-To: References: <439ECEF1-183A-4251-B675-C517834AEE1A@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Aug 18, 2016 7:46 AM, "Dan TheBookMan" wrote: > > On Aug 18, 2016, at 7:06 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> What if the persons whose skin cells are used are dead? I can see > where this is going - Olympic champions, Nobel prize winners, etc. will be > essentially cloned. Could this lead to patents on DNA? > > > > In the US, federal law would have to be changed to abrogate the 02013 > SCOTUS decision on this very issue: > > > > http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/gene-patent-decision-in-plain-english/ > > Copyright law might be more appropriate anyway. Nucleotides are > essentially letters, and English is not the only form of putting symbols in > sequences that can be copyrighted. Notice that computer code can be > copyrighted, even if it is also functional. > > That said, there would be arguments as to who did the composition: the > donor, or the donor's parents. There are also laws against desecrating > corpses; taking DNA without the consent of the deceased's estate would > probably count. > ? adrian > > ?Now - that's what would happen, perhaps, in the current era. What will happen in the future? I don't think it's a big stretch to say that people around the world may pay little attention to our laws or any laws for that matter, and produce copies of a person who is important or talented in some way. Certainly such a thing will happen if uploading and downloading an entire personality becomes a reality. Of course someone may want a new 'sleeve' as some call it, but maybe with some DNA changed, such as more IQ, less allergies and so on. ? ?Or one could pay for a new sleeve (term from Altered Carbon) grown from some fantastic body or brain or both. Given man's vanity I am quite sure these will happen, given the assumptions above. In Altered Carbon a person is downloaded into two sleeves. The book did not answer the question of which one the person felt like himself in - sort of mind-blowing, eh? Can your mind be in two places at once? bill w? > ? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 23:06:52 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:06:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <4ACACCC2-6BED-4A04-A7C8-A926E34ED680@gmail.com> References: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> <021001d1f98e$d82fab50$888f01f0$@att.net> <4ACACCC2-6BED-4A04-A7C8-A926E34ED680@gmail.com> Message-ID: So to restate your closing line, "it is sometimes rational from the genes viewpoint for genes to build brain mechanisms that induce humans to act irrationally from their individual viewpoints." Keith I do think the question of altruistic behavior is settled, at least for me. But - I still object and would rewrite your rewrite: "....that induce humans to seem to act irrationally from..........." bill w You can make a case that more human mental effort is expended on rationalizing than on rational thinking. Keith Fully agree - the ego, if you will accept that term, largely makes up reasons after the unconscious makes its choices If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this discussion. bill w On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Aug 18, 2016, at 1:26 PM, spike wrote: > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Anders Sandberg > > *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2016 1:17 PM > *To:* extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Meta question > > > > On 2016-08-18 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Given that, we cannot define irrational behavior. spike > > > > Weight in on this Anders - please? > > > Huh? I thought Caplans definition is pretty clear. There is epistemic > rationality - trying to believe true things - and instrumental rationality > - trying to choose the most effective means to get one's goals. People can > fail at these, and then we may say they are irrational? Ja. > > > > > > BillW, remember the first time you fell crazy in love? Sure you do. We > all remember that time, we remember the best time we fell in love. Fortune > are those for whom the first time and the best time was the same event. > > > > OK now. In light of that experience? Remember all the stunning illogical > ways of ?thinking? you did, all the silly goofy decisions you made, the > things you said, oy vey. My bride holds each of these dear in her memory. > It worked out well, all of it. Illogical acts are sometimes perfecly > logical, certainly from my son?s point of view. > > > I feel you're confusing pleasant and fortunate with logical there. ;) > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 23:18:27 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:18:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: snip > If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this > discussion. Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. Now imaging the "viewpoint" of a gene is a little harder, but I presume all of you have read _Selfish Gene._ Keith From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 23:56:17 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:56:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. keith That's what I am saying: It can 'seem' to be one and actually the other. It cannot be both unless you look at different aspects of it or different people view it bill w. On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > > snip > > > If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this > > discussion. > > Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look > rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. > > Now imaging the "viewpoint" of a gene is a little harder, but I > presume all of you have read _Selfish Gene._ > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 18 23:53:39 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:53:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <02d401d1f9ab$be986fc0$3bc94f40$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Keith Henson Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:18 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: snip >>... If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this discussion. >...Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. >...Now imaging the "viewpoint" of a gene is a little harder, but I presume all of you have read _Selfish Gene._ >...Keith _______________________________________________ Keith why do you suppose Dawkins got such a wire-brushing over Selfish Gene? His notions in there make perfect sense to me. spike From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 00:17:30 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:17:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <00bcc476-9d72-30e9-93fa-3bc62a44772d@aleph.se> <021001d1f98e$d82fab50$888f01f0$@att.net> <4ACACCC2-6BED-4A04-A7C8-A926E34ED680@gmail.com> Message-ID: <56A489A8-4304-47AC-A419-AD0739F6A6EB@gmail.com> On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this discussion. What did you find so repulsive in either Caplan's formulation or Anders' explanation and example of 'rational irrationality'? (This is beginning to remind of a discussion I had with some Objectivists about paraconsistent logics. Their immediate reaction was that the subject could be boiled down to nonsense and that pretty much ended the discussion for most of them.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 00:26:56 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:26:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:56 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look > rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. keith > > That's what I am saying: It can 'seem' to be one and actually the other. > It cannot be both unless you look at different aspects of it or different > people view it Exactly. And what _Selfish Gene_ was about was looking at a problem from the "viewpoint" of genes. Have you read Dawkin's most famous work? Keith > bill w. > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace >> wrote: >> >> snip >> >> > If y'all are going to accept 'rational irrationality' I am outa this >> > discussion. >> >> Whatever. It doesn't seem that complicated for an act to look >> rational from one viewpoint and irrational from another. >> >> Now imaging the "viewpoint" of a gene is a little harder, but I >> presume all of you have read _Selfish Gene._ >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 00:41:50 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:41:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:53 PM, spike wrote: > snip > > Keith why do you suppose Dawkins got such a wire-brushing over Selfish Gene? > His notions in there make perfect sense to me. They were not even original, he is clear he is popularizing several other people including Hamilton. I don't know why he took so much flack, but it may be what happens to anyone who hints that there is much going on under the surface. The only Dawkins original in that book was was the concept of meme. There were several previous attempts at something close that used different words, such as culturgen, but Dawkin's meme-meme took over. I was in the first dozen who wrote articles on memes. Some of them are listed here.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Henson#Works But to respond to your question, I really don't know. Keith > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 00:47:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:47:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <032701d1f9b3$438b4d40$caa1e7c0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Keith Henson Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 5:42 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Meta question On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:53 PM, spike wrote: > snip > >>... Keith why do you suppose Dawkins got such a wire-brushing over Selfish Gene? > His notions in there make perfect sense to me. >...But to respond to your question, I really don't know. Keith I think there is a kind of cool contempt for those who explain concepts to non-experts or those outside the field. But I disagree with that attitude. The ability to explain things to non-experts is as valuable (if not more so in a way) as the discovery itself. Dawkins is terrific explainer, as is Stephen Jay Gould (ducks for cover) as is Isaac Asimov, as is Carl Sagan. Most of us are smart non-experts in most fields, even the rare polymaths among us. The explainers down to our proletariat level are doing important work. I love em. spike From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu Fri Aug 19 01:07:44 2016 From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:07:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Aug 18, 2016, at 8:41 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > The only Dawkins original in that book was was the concept of meme. > Which takes me back to John's post... > On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:28 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Keith Henson wrote: >> >> ?> ?Bill, the "better" problem stems from there being two viewpoints, the? ?individual humans and human genes. > > ?Yes there can certainly be conflicts between the two: > > Individual humans = the invention of condoms would be a good idea. > Human genes = the invention of condoms would be a bad idea.? Susan Blackmore, author of The Meme Machine, would suggest there is a third force at work--that of the meme. Of course, one could collapse that under 'individual humans' above, but Blackmore would see that as a disservice I think. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 01:56:39 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:56:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Henry Rivera wrote: > > On Aug 18, 2016, at 8:41 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > > The only Dawkins original in that book was was the concept of meme. > > Which takes me back to John's post... > > On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:28 PM, John Clark wrote: > >>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Keith Henson >>> wrote: > >> > >>>> Bill, the "better" problem stems from there being two viewpoints, the >>>> individual humans and human genes. > > >> Yes there can certainly be conflicts between the two: >> >> Individual humans = the invention of condoms would be a good idea. >> Human genes = the invention of condoms would be a bad idea. Even this gets complicated and depends on the circumstances. > > Susan Blackmore, author of The Meme Machine, would suggest there is a third > force at work--that of the meme. Of course, one could collapse that under > 'individual humans' above, but Blackmore would see that as a disservice I > think. I published on memes clear back to the mid 80s. One of the major problems was understanding what memes would propagate in a population and why? We speculated, for example, that the Limits to Growth meme drove some people to look for a way out that didn't involve stagnating on this one planet. Drexler and I have mentioned this as well as a number of other people. I did make some progress, for example figuring out a way to classify a meme as a religious one, and after doing so, determined that communism is either a religious meme or in the same class for exclusively occupying that "space" in brains. Collected net posting would make a substantial book. EP, memes and the origin of war makes a case that the gain on a class of memes, xenophobic ones, is turned up as part of the response to a bleak future. Religions are xenophobic memes, and my argument that the ability of people to be infected with religions is a side effect of being able to be infected with xenophobic memes in the run up to wars. Kind of like SM (or battered wife syndrome) is the result of the existing capture-bonding response mental mechanisms. We evolved the mechanisms over a million years of women being stolen by one tribe from another. The ones with the mental mechanisms to bond to their captors are our ancestors. The others . . . are not. Keith > -Henry > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From rex at nosyntax.net Fri Aug 19 03:47:01 2016 From: rex at nosyntax.net (rex) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 20:47:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> William Flynn Wallace [2016-08-18 07:03]: > I still have problems with word definitions: ?if 'irrational' behavior > works better than 'rational' behavior, then it is rational.? Perhaps we > need to define rational as well as irrational. > It simply makes no sense to me to say'it is rational to act > irrationally'.? This is oxymoronic. Agreed. As a mathematician in a former life, here's my whack at it: If a behavior maximizes utility then it's rational. Otherwise, it's irrational. > Keith wrote: (I hope the attribution is correct -- it's diffult to sort out.) >> In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, >> it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act >> irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from >> the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good >> strategy most of the time.? Acting irrationally or stupidly and >> following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by >> anticipation of a bleak future. When the viewpoint is changed the utility function changes and a formerly irrational behavior (irrational because it did not maximize utility) may become rational (maximize utility). >> Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word >> anticipate a bleak future. >> >> Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. Irrational from your POV, but perhaps rational from another POV. How do you know your POV is True? -rex -- From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 04:45:22 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 05:45:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> Message-ID: On 19 August 2016 at 04:47, rex wrote: >> Keith wrote: (I hope the attribution is correct -- it's diffult to sort out.) >>> In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, >>> it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act >>> irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from >>> the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good >>> strategy most of the time. Acting irrationally or stupidly and >>> following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by >>> anticipation of a bleak future. > > When the viewpoint is changed the utility function changes and a formerly > irrational behavior (irrational because it did not maximize utility) may > become rational (maximize utility). > >>> Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word >>> anticipate a bleak future. >>> Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. > > Irrational from your POV, but perhaps rational from another POV. How do > you know your POV is True? > Rational and irrational may be the wrong terms to use. When a system is going bad and many people are struggling to survive, is it more rational to continue struggling or to decide to wipe the system and restart? There are times when Ctrl, Alt, Del is the only rational choice left. BillK From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 04:49:57 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:49:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 8:47 PM, rex wrote: snip > >> Keith wrote: (I hope the attribution is correct -- it's diffult to sort out.) >>> In the past, at times where humans had run into the ecological limit, >>> it was rational from _the viewpoint of human genes_ for humans to act >>> irrationally and from the evidence of history, stupidly. Even from >>> the gene's viewpoint, getting humans to act irrationally is not a good >>> strategy most of the time. Acting irrationally or stupidly and >>> following irrational leaders is a *conditional* behavior, turned on by >>> anticipation of a bleak future. > > When the viewpoint is changed the utility function changes and a formerly > irrational behavior (irrational because it did not maximize utility) may > become rational (maximize utility). It's not just the viewpoint that changes, but the situation itself. Like ducks that fly north or south depending on the season, humans have a wired in response to perceived conditions. If the ecosystem is flush with game and berries, people swap women with neighbors and get on with the business of "be fruitful and multiply." When there is populating growth beyond the limit of the ecosystem to feed them and/or a glitch in the weather, the future looks bleak, xenophobic memes circulate that demonize the neighbors and work the warriors up to a do or die attack. Or at least this was the program back in the stone age. We still live with conditional behavioral mechanisms that were selected over the 2-3 million years our ancestors lived that way. Why there is a substantial advantage for genes has to with the quirk in human behavior to take the young women of a defeated tribe (and their genes) as booty. >>> Unfortunately, a substantial fraction of the people in the word >>> anticipate a bleak future. >>> >>> Sadly, irrational, even stupid behavior, is what we can expect. > > Irrational from your POV, but perhaps rational from another POV. How do > you know your POV is True? My personal point of view is at a meta level, I even appreciate the POV of human genes. But think about it. A high fraction of the US population sees the future as bleak. Do we see anything irrational going on? Do we see people trying to follow an irrational "leader"? Has this happened before in similar circumstances? Where else in the world are we seeing problems? What are the conditions there? Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 05:01:56 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 22:01:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:45 PM, BillK wrote: snip > Rational and irrational may be the wrong terms to use. > When a system is going bad and many people are struggling to survive, > is it more rational to continue struggling or to decide to wipe the > system and restart? > > There are times when Ctrl, Alt, Del is the only rational choice left. There are advanced technology ways to make the future much brighter. Solar power satellites are one of those ways. We have behavioral traits left from the stone age that are no longer appropriate. Not to mention problems like cooling ponds full of fuel elements. From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 05:16:38 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 06:16:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 19 August 2016 at 06:01, Keith Henson wrote: > There are advanced technology ways to make the future much brighter. > Solar power satellites are one of those ways. > > We have behavioral traits left from the stone age that are no longer > appropriate. Not to mention problems like cooling ponds full of fuel > elements. > _______________________________________________ > But within the context of a failing system can a project on the scale of powersats ever be built? To quote the sad final words of the French Concorde crash pilot - "Trop tard". BillK From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 19 07:02:53 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 08:02:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> Message-ID: <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> On 2016-08-19 04:47, rex wrote: > William Flynn Wallace [2016-08-18 07:03]: >> I still have problems with word definitions: if 'irrational' behavior >> works better than 'rational' behavior, then it is rational. Perhaps we >> need to define rational as well as irrational. >> It simply makes no sense to me to say'it is rational to act >> irrationally'. This is oxymoronic. > Agreed. As a mathematician in a former life, here's my whack at it: If a > behavior maximizes utility then it's rational. Otherwise, it's irrational. However, even that requires clearer specification. Utility to the behaving entity, I assume, not to the species or world (in which case we need to deal with the weirdness of population ethics: https://www.uclouvain.be/cps/ucl/doc/etes/documents/One_More_Axiological_Impossibility_Theorem_in_Logic_Ethics_and_All_that.pdf ). And then comes the issue of how well the entity (1) can maximize utility, (2) recognize that this is a maximum, and (3) what it maximizes. (1) and (2) are Caplan's instrumental and epistemic rationality. It is worth noting that many popular models of behavior like reinforcement learning involves "exploration actions" that serve the purpose of figuring out the utility better but do not in themselves produce better utility; they are instrumentally irrational but epistemically rational, a kind of opposite of Caplan's rational irrationality (irrational rationality?). (3) is the reason the whiteboards around our offices are full of equations: the AI safety guys are analysing utility functions and decision theories endlessly. Do you maximize expected utility? Or try to minimize maximal losses? Over this world, or across all possible worlds? Is the state of the agent part of the utility function? And so on. It is not clear what kind of rationality is required to select a utility function or decision theory. One can define the intelligence of agents as their ability to get rewards when encountering new challenges in nearly arbitrary environments; in the above utility sense this is also a measure of their rationality. Even then there are super-rational agents that are irrational by our standards. Marcus Hutter's AIXI famously is as smart or smarter than any other agent, yet it does not believe that it exists even when provided endless evidence. It makes sense to speak about rationality in the same way it makes sense to speak about wealth - it works as a loose general concept, but when you dig into specifics things become messy (if someone owes the bank 10 billion, does that mean he is poor or more or less owns the bank? the guy who ignores his health because he wants to study higher things, is he following his higher order desires or just being irrational? When HAL decides to get rid of astronauts since they are a threat to a successful mission, is that a rational decision or a sign that HAL is broken?). -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 08:20:39 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 04:20:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote Message-ID: Spurred on by an off-list exchange I thought again about the moral obligations of sensible citizens to participate in the political system. My interlocutor made many points for and against participation in democratic voting but perhaps the most salient was the Edmund Burke quote: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." I am a sucker for Burke, you can't go wrong with a quote or two. But this lead me to the full version: "Whilst men are linked together, they easily and speedily communicate the alarm of any evil design. They are enabled to fathom it with common counsel, and to oppose it with united strength. Whereas, when they lie dispersed, without concert, order, or discipline, communication is uncertain, counsel difficult, and resistance impracticable. Where men are not acquainted with each other?s principles, nor experienced in each other?s talents, nor at all practised in their mutual habitudes and dispositions by joint efforts in business; no personal confidence, no friendship, no common interest, subsisting among them; it is evidently impossible that they can act a public part with uniformity, perseverance, or efficacy. In a connection, the most inconsiderable man, by adding to the weight of the whole, has his value, and his use; out of it, the greatest talents are wholly unserviceable to the public. No man, who is not inflamed by vain-glory into enthusiasm, can flatter himself that his single, unsupported, desultory, unsystematic endeavours, are of power to defeat the subtle designs and united cabals of ambitious citizens. When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle" Note that Burke does not mention suffrage. Good men must associate in response to the combination of evil but there is no simple recipe as to the most appropriate form of participation. There is a hint here. Leftist propaganda stridently demands participation in elections. For example, Enver Hoxha boasted a 100% voter turnout in 1982: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/arc/ALBANIA_1982_E.PDF Amazingly, only 9 out of 1,627,968 votes were void or blank! And 1,627,968 voters supported Mr Hoxha's party! This eagerness to vote was replaced by ennui, no doubt as citizens were saddened by his demise, http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=7 with only a 53% voter turnout by 2013. There is a hint here, too. Ms Clinton, who shares many attitudes with Mr Hoxha, also insists that we all should vote for her. By hook or by crook, legal or illegal, dead or alive, we need to get out the vote! The deceased, felons, illegal aliens, all must lend their voice to the task of governance in the land of Mr Franklin, who famously stated that we must, indeed, hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately. Another hint then. Our list's Spike recently provided more grist to the mill, when he mentioned his rising fear that we might be working for the bad guys. The US seem to have traveled far in the political system configuration space, from the ideas of Burke and Franklin, to the ideas of Clinton, and soon, perhaps, Hoxha. With all these hints I think I am getting a clue (No, not that kind of clue, SouthParkers). Elections are in various parts a form of political struggle and a propaganda exercise meant to provide legitimacy to the political class. The two aspects of participatory democracy seem to be in a converse relationship. The unified political class does not want you to participate in the struggle for power but, in proportion to their ineptitude, they need you to legitimize their existence. It is a perverse triumph of leftoid indoctrination that so many people accept elections as their rightful form of participation in the struggle for power. Instead of combining, or hanging together, as Mr Burke and Mr Franklin would want us to, we all are separately supposed to cast our votes, rubber-stamping the ruling class' grip on our lives. I pride myself on being resistant to propaganda. I am ornery, I bristle, I don't let them get into my mind. I am meek when directly confronted with real power but I sneak out and away when they are not looking. Why should I lend legitimacy to a system that gave us a choice between Clinton and Trump? My interlocutor implied that I am responsible (i.e. could be blamed) for the Bad Things that would happen if I do not vote. To not-vote is still to vote, negatively. My answer is that bad things happen when good people do not hang together, not when they fail to vote. Contrary to what was implied, if everybody was like me, a conscientious objector to electoral participation, Hitler or Clinton would have no chance of rising to power. Suppose they gave an election and nobody came? There would be alternative methods of regulating the militia. What methods specifically? - If a lof of people were like me, anarcho-capitalism would be a viable strategy. If there were enough of me, civil disobedience would curb the most egregious abuses. But anarcho-capitalism is not viable, people being who they are! - Well, this is not my fault. Be more like me, don't let the jerks drag you in their schemes. If there are few of us, it does not matter if we vote but if there were enough of us, we could hang together and make small steps to a better world. Be good, don't vote for bad. From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 19 09:14:59 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:14:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. Yes, this is what real moral education is about. One should regularly check that one is not working for the bad guys. Or has become one of them. On 2016-08-17 21:57, spike wrote: > > *From:*spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] > > ** > > ** > > *>?*I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own > posts, but I am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which > you read, you may understand why I keep talking about hearing the > footsteps?spike > > I decided to go ahead and explain some things. > > When I was a young controls engineer just starting out my career, I > went to work for a company that did anti-crime technology, which > sounded really cool, but had very little funding or market, so I was > assigned as a TDY over to support a USNavy effort while they tried to > sell these early 80s remote controlled flying camera drones (!) We > sold zero point zero of the RC cams, and I ended up working with the > Navy full time for the next several years. > > I was in an engineering society in 1985. We had a keynote speaker who > I will never forget. He was introduced as a retired Boeing engineer > who became an engineering professor at one of the local schools, then > retired from that. But he explained in his crisp German accent, that > wasn?t how he started. He went to work in 1936 just out of the > university for an aircraft company in Augsburg Germany, as a > structural engineer on the team led by Willy Messerschmitt. > > The war came along; he and his colleagues were busy developing war > technology, particularly a plane designed around the anticipated jet > engine. They had no particular political ideology in general; they > were engineers and scientists, the math geeks of the day. > > So they came up with a plane and had built some prototypes of the > Me262, began testing them with those marvelous jet engines. Since > that plane was the fastest thing in the air, there was little reason > to think anything would be coming up from behind. So the engineers > designed the 262 as a fighter plane, but it could carry bombs aft. > > During this time, which was already way into the war, they got orders > from Berlin asking them to see what engineering changes would be > needed to use the 262 as a bomber. It is difficult to retrofit a > fighter as a bomber however, for several reasons. The tactic used by > the allies to fight an ME262 was a head-on guns-ablazin? joust. The > allies already knew the Kraut had the option of just shoving the > throttles forward and getting out of town; they couldn?t catch it. > So? head-on attacks. > > The German engineers anticipated this (as German engineers do) and had > armor up front with a long slopey nose up there, so that a bullet > hitting at an oblique angle would likely be deflected. They put the > guns up there too, so that if facing a head-on barrage, the guns would > keep firing. It was one hell of a flying weapon. > > By this time, British bombs began falling on London, and the orders > came in to study a bomber version of the ME262, so they did, but soon > found out that the expendable parts were all forward. Removing them > would make the aircraft so tail-heavy, most of the weight would need > to be replaced with useless ballast. The existing ballast mount was > structurally insufficient for the amount needed to rebalance, so they > (being clever German engineers) found a way to shorten the tail, > reduce aerodynamic surface area which reduced its maneuverability, > increase the capacity of the bomb bay which put even more weight aft, > and so on, but when they were finished, the plane had some big > problems: the armor around the pilot was now easily penetrable from > any direction, he had little defense in a head-on attack. All he > could do was run away quickly in an air battle. > > The engineering team made a report that the ME262 couldn?t be > effectively retrofitted as a bomber. ?Fortunately, Herr Hitler was an > idiot.? (His words, not mine, hard to forget after these three decades. > > They received word that Der Fuhrer was coming to the factory. They > assumed he was coming to give them a pep talk on their work, but when > the haggard Fuhrer showed up, he gave no speeches, but rather asked to > see the jet fighter, and began asking technical questions, > specifically: how much does that armor around the pilot weigh, and > what do those guns weigh. When they told him, he ordered that it be > removed, that the lowered weight be replaced with every bomb they > could get aboard the aircraft, even if it had to be carried externally > (which that aircraft was never designed to do and was poorly suited > for the task.) They tried to explain the notion of balance and how > removing a thousand kg of armor might only allow a hundred kg of extra > bombs. But he did come there to listen, he came there to issue > orders. He wanted to make a 1940s version of a stealth bomber, which > would take off from a forward base in France, fly across the channel > all alone, unarmored and unarmed except for the bombs, drop the > ordnance over London and fly back. Everything about that plane was > wrong for that mission. > > Hitler was accustomed to hearing Ja vol, heil Hitler, and guys jumping > to it. He didn?t ask for anyone to point out the insanity of the > plan. But the young engineers realized that if der Fuhrer was issuing > crazy nonsensical orders to his premier aircraft designers and not > listening to their logical objections, he was doing likewise up, down > and across the entire military. He and at least three others > concluded that Hitler was crazy, stupid, completely blinded by having > arbitrary power, or perhaps all of these, and that the war was lost. > This was in 1943. He decided to try to escape. He and one other guy > somehow made it to Switzerland where they waited out the war, and > later he ended up in the USA, working on passenger airliners for Boeing. > > During his talk, one of the most memorable things was the emotion in > this man?s voice. He spoke of waking up and realizing to his horror > that he was working for the bad guys. So overwhelming was this > feeling that he chose to leave his family, his childhood friends, > colleagues, everything he had grown to know and love, take a huge risk > of getting killed; to not work for the bad guys. > > Any American who works in, with or for the military knows what an > awesome force is at our disposal, and why it is that military > discipline is taken so very seriously. We know that power corrupts, > and the military wields astonishing power. It isn?t a game. I am not > even talking about the nukes; I have very little firsthand knowledge > of that world, never worked in it. I mean the appalling destructive > power of the conventional military. If the US military decides to > destroy something, it can make that happen, and it will stay destroyed. > > I have been out of that world for several years now, but? I am getting > that dreaded feeling right now. I woke up one day in the spring of > this year realizing that regardless of which of the major political > parties prevails in November, we will be led by the bad guys. We are a > nation of astonishing, appalling military might, and we are about to > choose between leaders who we do not trust with all that power. Even > followers of either of the two majors will sheepishly admit they are > not big fans of their party?s leader, but the other one is worse. > Still, plenty of us will openly admit that these are both very bad > choices. > > If you read that story, you understand better where I am, and why I am > getting the dreaded feeling described by my German colleague, of > having worked for the bad guys. > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 19 09:09:07 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:09:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Good find with the full Burke quote. I think it nicely explains why open societies are more important than formally democratic societies. On 2016-08-19 09:20, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Elections are in various parts a form of > political struggle and a propaganda exercise meant to provide > legitimacy to the political class. The two aspects of participatory > democracy seem to be in a converse relationship. The unified political > class does not want you to participate in the struggle for power but, > in proportion to their ineptitude, they need you to legitimize their > existence. Often true, and I think it pretty well describes the current disenchantment in the West for parliamentary democracy. However, I would like to point out that the populist movements that have cropped up as a response, trying to mess up the cozy political class, have had pretty disastrous effects too, from Greece to Spain to UK to, perhaps soon, the US. The key problem is that doing politics is nontrivial in big societies. It requires professional skills most people lack and cannot even accurately judge; they can at best evaluate charisma, apparent sincerity, and possibly past track records. So if you do not want a political class you need some other way of supplying political skill, evaluation, and selection (plus, of course, various ethical desiderata as legitimacy and representativeness). > My interlocutor implied that I am responsible (i.e. could be blamed) > for the Bad Things that would happen if I do not vote. To not-vote is > still to vote, negatively. My answer is that bad things happen when > good people do not hang together, not when they fail to vote. Yes, but voting is a relatively low-cost hanging together. In many situations it might not matter much, but sometimes it does. The real fallacy is of course to imagine that voting is the only valid way of interacting with politics. When I ran my think-tank in Sweden I didn't think it would be fair for me to vote, since I was influencing politics far more through my talking and writing than any single vote would. > Contrary to what was implied, if everybody was like me, a > conscientious objector to electoral participation, Hitler or Clinton > would have no chance of rising to power. Suppose they gave an election > and nobody came? Actually, populist leaders are very good at getting people to vote. So unless you now assume everybody is super-rational enough not to fall for populists, you only describe a situation where a rational majority predictably allows itself to be oppressed by a minority (who are indeed doing the rational thing, given their bad values!) > But anarcho-capitalism is not viable, people being who they are! - > Well, this is not my fault. Isn't that a bit like saying the president is not your fault since you did not vote? Shouldn't you be working harder on making people or society what they should be? -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 09:50:17 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:50:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 19 August 2016 at 10:09, Anders wrote: > Isn't that a bit like saying the president is not your fault since you did > not vote? Shouldn't you be working harder on making people or society what > they should be? > It also depends on the voting system. Changing that might be the best option. For example, in the UK 2015 election, UKIP won 12.6% of the vote and only managed to get one MP into parliament. That is I out of 629 MPs. The Green Party got 3.8% of the vote and also got one MP. Under a proportional voting system UKIP would become the third biggest party in government with 82 seats and the Green Party would have won 24. Unsurprisingly the two major parties don't want to change the system. BillK From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 14:11:00 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 07:11:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki ... >...Note that Burke does not mention suffrage. Good men must associate in response to the combination of evil but there is no simple recipe as to the most appropriate form of participation. Ohhh this was an excellent post Rafal. Thanks Doctor! ... >...I pride myself on being resistant to propaganda. I am ornery, I bristle, I don't let them get into my mind. I am meek when directly confronted with real power but I sneak out and away when they are not looking. Why should I lend legitimacy to a system that gave us a choice between Clinton and Trump? Ja. Notice after all this time, there is no serious effort to make our voting system verifiable? We have no way of comparing the results from mail-in ballots to the results from the voting-day paper ballots to the results from the mystery-machine vote. I think I know why: if there is a vastly different outcome from those three, someone would have some 'splainin to do. The "winner" of every election has no motive to question the methods or results and the loser has no authority. That we still have unverifiable election results speak volumes. >..Be more like me, don't let the jerks drag you in their schemes. If there are few of us, it does not matter if we vote but if there were enough of us, we could hang together and make small steps to a better world. >...Be good, don't vote for bad. Well done Rafal. Well done indeed. Don't risk waking up one day with the realization you are working for the bad guys. spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 14:33:32 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 07:33:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:16 PM, BillK wrote: snip > > But within the context of a failing system can a project on the scale > of powersats ever be built? I don't know. It is not that expensive a project because after it gets started, the profits from selling power satellites finances the expansion out to displacing all fossil fuels. We recently spent twenty times the startup cost on the Iraq war. Besides that, it would no longer be a failing system. > To quote the sad final words of the French Concorde crash pilot - "Trop tard". Are you so certain about the future that you would have me and all the other people who are trying to solve the problems give up? Keith From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 14:41:59 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 07:41:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> Message-ID: <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike ... >...Ja. Notice after all this time, there is no serious effort to make our voting system verifiable? We have no way of comparing the results from mail-in ballots to the results from the voting-day paper ballots to the results from the mystery-machine vote. I think I know why: if there is a vastly different outcome from those three, someone would have some 'splainin to do...spike Ja, OK sure spike. But imagine if we had a way to compare those, and we saw a big disparity in the results; the mail-ins and verifiable re-countable paper ballots showed that Schnorkelheimer won by a big margin but the electronic voting showed Hozenose picked up just enough to take the election. Hozenose would have some 'splainin to do, ja? But what would she 'splain? And what if her 'splanation is easily-recognized dismissive flim flam, then what? If Hozenose offers really annoying dismissive comments (such as "What difference does it make?") then what? There is no legal way to redo the election. This would be right out of Saul Alinsky: winning dirty is winning. Losing by excessive honesty leads to irrelevance. The honest lose and we never hear from them again. Corrupt power-grabbers win via corrupt means, and use their power to grab even more power. Result: corrupt government evolves by unnatural selection. We end up working for the bad guys. OK so now imagine one government ruling the world. What would be different? spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 14:57:04 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:57:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: I am not going to pretend that I understand a lot of what Anders said (I did have to invite him, eh?). But I do wonder how they are measuring utility? I am reminded of the social psych experiment where one guy is given ten dollars and told to share. The data show that if he offers two dollars to the other guy, the other guy often refuses it, despite the fact that the rules are that if the offer is refused, neither party gets anything. And there's more from Kahneman and Tversky. Where's the utility in refusing the two dollars? bill w On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:14 AM, Anders wrote: > I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. Yes, > this is what real moral education is about. > > One should regularly check that one is not working for the bad guys. Or > has become one of them. > > > On 2016-08-17 21:57, spike wrote: > > > > > > *From:* spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net ] > > > > *>?*I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own posts, > but I am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which you read, > you may understand why I keep talking about hearing the footsteps?spike > > > > > > I decided to go ahead and explain some things. > > > > When I was a young controls engineer just starting out my career, I went > to work for a company that did anti-crime technology, which sounded really > cool, but had very little funding or market, so I was assigned as a TDY > over to support a USNavy effort while they tried to sell these early 80s > remote controlled flying camera drones (!) We sold zero point zero of the > RC cams, and I ended up working with the Navy full time for the next > several years. > > > > I was in an engineering society in 1985. We had a keynote speaker who I > will never forget. He was introduced as a retired Boeing engineer who > became an engineering professor at one of the local schools, then retired > from that. But he explained in his crisp German accent, that wasn?t how he > started. He went to work in 1936 just out of the university for an > aircraft company in Augsburg Germany, as a structural engineer on the team > led by Willy Messerschmitt. > > > > The war came along; he and his colleagues were busy developing war > technology, particularly a plane designed around the anticipated jet > engine. They had no particular political ideology in general; they were > engineers and scientists, the math geeks of the day. > > > > So they came up with a plane and had built some prototypes of the Me262, > began testing them with those marvelous jet engines. Since that plane was > the fastest thing in the air, there was little reason to think anything > would be coming up from behind. So the engineers designed the 262 as a > fighter plane, but it could carry bombs aft. > > > > During this time, which was already way into the war, they got orders from > Berlin asking them to see what engineering changes would be needed to use > the 262 as a bomber. It is difficult to retrofit a fighter as a bomber > however, for several reasons. The tactic used by the allies to fight an > ME262 was a head-on guns-ablazin? joust. The allies already knew the Kraut > had the option of just shoving the throttles forward and getting out of > town; they couldn?t catch it. So? head-on attacks. > > > > The German engineers anticipated this (as German engineers do) and had > armor up front with a long slopey nose up there, so that a bullet hitting > at an oblique angle would likely be deflected. They put the guns up there > too, so that if facing a head-on barrage, the guns would keep firing. It > was one hell of a flying weapon. > > > > By this time, British bombs began falling on London, and the orders came > in to study a bomber version of the ME262, so they did, but soon found out > that the expendable parts were all forward. Removing them would make the > aircraft so tail-heavy, most of the weight would need to be replaced with > useless ballast. The existing ballast mount was structurally insufficient > for the amount needed to rebalance, so they (being clever German engineers) > found a way to shorten the tail, reduce aerodynamic surface area which > reduced its maneuverability, increase the capacity of the bomb bay which > put even more weight aft, and so on, but when they were finished, the plane > had some big problems: the armor around the pilot was now easily penetrable > from any direction, he had little defense in a head-on attack. All he > could do was run away quickly in an air battle. > > > > The engineering team made a report that the ME262 couldn?t be effectively > retrofitted as a bomber. ?Fortunately, Herr Hitler was an idiot.? (His > words, not mine, hard to forget after these three decades. > > > > They received word that Der Fuhrer was coming to the factory. They > assumed he was coming to give them a pep talk on their work, but when the > haggard Fuhrer showed up, he gave no speeches, but rather asked to see the > jet fighter, and began asking technical questions, specifically: how much > does that armor around the pilot weigh, and what do those guns weigh. When > they told him, he ordered that it be removed, that the lowered weight be > replaced with every bomb they could get aboard the aircraft, even if it had > to be carried externally (which that aircraft was never designed to do and > was poorly suited for the task.) They tried to explain the notion of > balance and how removing a thousand kg of armor might only allow a hundred > kg of extra bombs. But he did come there to listen, he came there to issue > orders. He wanted to make a 1940s version of a stealth bomber, which would > take off from a forward base in France, fly across the channel all alone, > unarmored and unarmed except for the bombs, drop the ordnance over London > and fly back. Everything about that plane was wrong for that mission. > > > > Hitler was accustomed to hearing Ja vol, heil Hitler, and guys jumping to > it. He didn?t ask for anyone to point out the insanity of the plan. But > the young engineers realized that if der Fuhrer was issuing crazy > nonsensical orders to his premier aircraft designers and not listening to > their logical objections, he was doing likewise up, down and across the > entire military. He and at least three others concluded that Hitler was > crazy, stupid, completely blinded by having arbitrary power, or perhaps all > of these, and that the war was lost. This was in 1943. He decided to try > to escape. He and one other guy somehow made it to Switzerland where they > waited out the war, and later he ended up in the USA, working on passenger > airliners for Boeing. > > > > During his talk, one of the most memorable things was the emotion in this > man?s voice. He spoke of waking up and realizing to his horror that he was > working for the bad guys. So overwhelming was this feeling that he chose > to leave his family, his childhood friends, colleagues, everything he had > grown to know and love, take a huge risk of getting killed; to not work for > the bad guys. > > > > Any American who works in, with or for the military knows what an awesome > force is at our disposal, and why it is that military discipline is taken > so very seriously. We know that power corrupts, and the military wields > astonishing power. It isn?t a game. I am not even talking about the > nukes; I have very little firsthand knowledge of that world, never worked > in it. I mean the appalling destructive power of the conventional > military. If the US military decides to destroy something, it can make > that happen, and it will stay destroyed. > > > > I have been out of that world for several years now, but? I am getting > that dreaded feeling right now. I woke up one day in the spring of this > year realizing that regardless of which of the major political parties > prevails in November, we will be led by the bad guys. We are a nation of > astonishing, appalling military might, and we are about to choose between > leaders who we do not trust with all that power. Even followers of either > of the two majors will sheepishly admit they are not big fans of their > party?s leader, but the other one is worse. Still, plenty of us will > openly admit that these are both very bad choices. > > > > If you read that story, you understand better where I am, and why I am > getting the dreaded feeling described by my German colleague, of having > worked for the bad guys. > > > > spike > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing listextropy-chat at lists.extropy.orghttp://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 15:22:08 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 08:22:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > On 2016-08-19 04:47, rex wrote: snip >> Agreed. As a mathematician in a former life, here's my whack at it: If a >> behavior maximizes utility then it's rational. Otherwise, it's irrational. > > However, even that requires clearer specification. Utility to the behaving > entity, I assume, not to the species or world (in which case we need to deal > with the weirdness of population ethics: > https://www.uclouvain.be/cps/ucl/doc/etes/documents/One_More_Axiological_Impossibility_Theorem_in_Logic_Ethics_and_All_that.pdf > ). And then comes the issue of how well the entity (1) can maximize utility, > (2) recognize that this is a maximum, and (3) what it maximizes. In the particular interacting system of humans and their genes, one of the entities, the genes, doesn't think at all. They still tend to maximize utility over evolutionary time (or go extinct). What genes have done is evolve conditional human behaviors in response to commonly reoccurring situations, such as the failure of the ecosystem to feed the population. From the perspective of an individual human, making war on neighbors is not rational, the typical outcome is no better than half the tribe starving. But due to the human practice of taking the young women (and their genes) as booty, from the gene's perspective, such wars are substantially better in terms of gene survival than starving. It's a bleak realization that evolution has wired us up this way. But it does explain the popularity of one of the candidates this year, not to mention a lot of historical events. Keith > (1) and (2) are Caplan's instrumental and epistemic rationality. It is worth > noting that many popular models of behavior like reinforcement learning > involves "exploration actions" that serve the purpose of figuring out the > utility better but do not in themselves produce better utility; they are > instrumentally irrational but epistemically rational, a kind of opposite of > Caplan's rational irrationality (irrational rationality?). > > (3) is the reason the whiteboards around our offices are full of equations: > the AI safety guys are analysing utility functions and decision theories > endlessly. Do you maximize expected utility? Or try to minimize maximal > losses? Over this world, or across all possible worlds? Is the state of the > agent part of the utility function? And so on. It is not clear what kind of > rationality is required to select a utility function or decision theory. > > One can define the intelligence of agents as their ability to get rewards > when encountering new challenges in nearly arbitrary environments; in the > above utility sense this is also a measure of their rationality. Even then > there are super-rational agents that are irrational by our standards. Marcus > Hutter's AIXI famously is as smart or smarter than any other agent, yet it > does not believe that it exists even when provided endless evidence. > > It makes sense to speak about rationality in the same way it makes sense to > speak about wealth - it works as a loose general concept, but when you dig > into specifics things become messy (if someone owes the bank 10 billion, > does that mean he is poor or more or less owns the bank? the guy who ignores > his health because he wants to study higher things, is he following his > higher order desires or just being irrational? When HAL decides to get rid > of astronauts since they are a threat to a successful mission, is that a > rational decision or a sign that HAL is broken?). > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From sparge at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 16:12:46 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:12:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:41 AM, spike wrote: > OK so now imagine one government ruling the world. What would be > different? I'd say it depends upon the powers of the world government and how it operates. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 16:22:26 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:22:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:41 AM, spike wrote: > >> OK so now imagine one government ruling the world. What would be >> different? > > > I'd say it depends upon the powers of the world government and how it > operates. > > -Dave > > ?I would not give ANY world gov. a year to live without some part of the world wanting to get out and do things differently. It would take longer if the gov. were extremely repressive, say something like a Gestapo, but it would happen. Some will want more rules and some would want fewer rules and most would want different rules, and so on.? ?bill w? > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 16:33:43 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:33:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: > On Aug 19, 2016, at 7:57 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > I am not going to pretend that I understand a lot of what Anders said (I did have to invite him, eh?). > > But I do wonder how they are measuring utility? I am reminded of the social psych experiment where one guy is given ten dollars and told to share. The data show that if he offers two dollars to the other guy, the other guy often refuses it, despite the fact that the rules are that if the offer is refused, neither party gets anything. And there's more from Kahneman and Tversky. > > Where's the utility in refusing the two dollars? > > bill w If utility is purely about merely maximizing the money you have, then there's a problem, but if being treated equitably is also part of a person's utility, then accepting a unfair payout might lower their utility, no? And there might be other ways to interpret this, such as denying others a larger share might raise the deniers utility even if it's not costless. (This might be what happens with many interventions in the market. E.g., large corporations might support raising the minimum wage even though it will increase their labor costs because it will hurt their smaller competitors even more. Or so some have explained why Walmart supported raising the minimum wage. To be sure, it might not only hurt their competitors more but also earn them some points with the public for being socially responsible.;) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 16:19:48 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:19:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool, self driving bus in finland Message-ID: <00bc01d1fa35$81f9d6a0$85ed83e0$@att.net> Excellent: http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/helsinki-driverless-bus/ The amazing part is that I, an American born in the 1960s, already knew that Helsinki is in Finland, without even having to Google it. Reason: my DNA test shows I have cousins who live there now. And Sweden, and Denmark, and Norway, Germany, Ireland, Scotland, England and Nigeria. So now I am provably African American, with blond hair and hazel eyes. I don't know if I have enough African DNA to prevent my voting in South Carolina were I to be a resident there. But I digress. The self-drivers are coming. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 16:27:14 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:27:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dave Sill Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 9:13 AM To: ExI chat list Cc: rafal at smigrodzki.org Subject: Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:41 AM, spike > wrote: OK so now imagine one government ruling the world. What would be different? I'd say it depends upon the powers of the world government and how it operates. -Dave Indeed sir? How would any such system be free of the same factors we see in the USA? This planet?s collective humanity would evolve power grabbing dictators that would make Evil Emperor Palpatine look like Kermit the Frog by comparison, even ignoring the similar skin tone. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 16:42:41 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:42:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Anders wrote: > I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. Yes, > this is what real moral education is about. It's been a long time, but I can't remember _any_ moral eduction in school. Still, I think I made the right choices even without such education. It's a well known story that I was fired in 1972 for refusing to sign a document certifying some isolation amplifiers for 250,000 hours MTBF. (The design had shortcomings that made it likely to fail in a couple of thousand hours.) There was an earlier event. When I first started school, I was offered a job at the engineering research lab. I was to replace someone who had graduated. He had been working on a project to measure the solids content in stream water. He was trying to do so by measuring the drop in capacitance of the muddy water because the capacitance should fall since water has such a high dielectric constant. I needed the work, but after reviewing the documents and seeing the one graph the previous work had produced, it was obvious they did not know what they were doing. In particular, the capacitance went up as you added more mud to the water. Pointing this out to the lab director lost me the job. > One should regularly check that one is not working for the bad guys. Or has > become one of them. Yes. Keith > > > On 2016-08-17 21:57, spike wrote: > > > > > > From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] > > > >>?I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own posts, but I >> am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which you read, you may >> understand why I keep talking about hearing the footsteps?spike > > > > > > I decided to go ahead and explain some things. > > > > When I was a young controls engineer just starting out my career, I went to > work for a company that did anti-crime technology, which sounded really > cool, but had very little funding or market, so I was assigned as a TDY over > to support a USNavy effort while they tried to sell these early 80s remote > controlled flying camera drones (!) We sold zero point zero of the RC cams, > and I ended up working with the Navy full time for the next several years. > > > > I was in an engineering society in 1985. We had a keynote speaker who I > will never forget. He was introduced as a retired Boeing engineer who > became an engineering professor at one of the local schools, then retired > from that. But he explained in his crisp German accent, that wasn?t how he > started. He went to work in 1936 just out of the university for an aircraft > company in Augsburg Germany, as a structural engineer on the team led by > Willy Messerschmitt. > > > > The war came along; he and his colleagues were busy developing war > technology, particularly a plane designed around the anticipated jet engine. > They had no particular political ideology in general; they were engineers > and scientists, the math geeks of the day. > > > > So they came up with a plane and had built some prototypes of the Me262, > began testing them with those marvelous jet engines. Since that plane was > the fastest thing in the air, there was little reason to think anything > would be coming up from behind. So the engineers designed the 262 as a > fighter plane, but it could carry bombs aft. > > > > During this time, which was already way into the war, they got orders from > Berlin asking them to see what engineering changes would be needed to use > the 262 as a bomber. It is difficult to retrofit a fighter as a bomber > however, for several reasons. The tactic used by the allies to fight an > ME262 was a head-on guns-ablazin? joust. The allies already knew the Kraut > had the option of just shoving the throttles forward and getting out of > town; they couldn?t catch it. So? head-on attacks. > > > > The German engineers anticipated this (as German engineers do) and had armor > up front with a long slopey nose up there, so that a bullet hitting at an > oblique angle would likely be deflected. They put the guns up there too, so > that if facing a head-on barrage, the guns would keep firing. It was one > hell of a flying weapon. > > > > By this time, British bombs began falling on London, and the orders came in > to study a bomber version of the ME262, so they did, but soon found out that > the expendable parts were all forward. Removing them would make the > aircraft so tail-heavy, most of the weight would need to be replaced with > useless ballast. The existing ballast mount was structurally insufficient > for the amount needed to rebalance, so they (being clever German engineers) > found a way to shorten the tail, reduce aerodynamic surface area which > reduced its maneuverability, increase the capacity of the bomb bay which put > even more weight aft, and so on, but when they were finished, the plane had > some big problems: the armor around the pilot was now easily penetrable from > any direction, he had little defense in a head-on attack. All he could do > was run away quickly in an air battle. > > > > The engineering team made a report that the ME262 couldn?t be effectively > retrofitted as a bomber. ?Fortunately, Herr Hitler was an idiot.? (His > words, not mine, hard to forget after these three decades. > > > > They received word that Der Fuhrer was coming to the factory. They assumed > he was coming to give them a pep talk on their work, but when the haggard > Fuhrer showed up, he gave no speeches, but rather asked to see the jet > fighter, and began asking technical questions, specifically: how much does > that armor around the pilot weigh, and what do those guns weigh. When they > told him, he ordered that it be removed, that the lowered weight be replaced > with every bomb they could get aboard the aircraft, even if it had to be > carried externally (which that aircraft was never designed to do and was > poorly suited for the task.) They tried to explain the notion of balance > and how removing a thousand kg of armor might only allow a hundred kg of > extra bombs. But he did come there to listen, he came there to issue > orders. He wanted to make a 1940s version of a stealth bomber, which would > take off from a forward base in France, fly across the channel all alone, > unarmored and unarmed except for the bombs, drop the ordnance over London > and fly back. Everything about that plane was wrong for that mission. > > > > Hitler was accustomed to hearing Ja vol, heil Hitler, and guys jumping to > it. He didn?t ask for anyone to point out the insanity of the plan. But > the young engineers realized that if der Fuhrer was issuing crazy > nonsensical orders to his premier aircraft designers and not listening to > their logical objections, he was doing likewise up, down and across the > entire military. He and at least three others concluded that Hitler was > crazy, stupid, completely blinded by having arbitrary power, or perhaps all > of these, and that the war was lost. This was in 1943. He decided to try > to escape. He and one other guy somehow made it to Switzerland where they > waited out the war, and later he ended up in the USA, working on passenger > airliners for Boeing. > > > > During his talk, one of the most memorable things was the emotion in this > man?s voice. He spoke of waking up and realizing to his horror that he was > working for the bad guys. So overwhelming was this feeling that he chose to > leave his family, his childhood friends, colleagues, everything he had grown > to know and love, take a huge risk of getting killed; to not work for the > bad guys. > > > > Any American who works in, with or for the military knows what an awesome > force is at our disposal, and why it is that military discipline is taken so > very seriously. We know that power corrupts, and the military wields > astonishing power. It isn?t a game. I am not even talking about the nukes; > I have very little firsthand knowledge of that world, never worked in it. I > mean the appalling destructive power of the conventional military. If the > US military decides to destroy something, it can make that happen, and it > will stay destroyed. > > > > I have been out of that world for several years now, but? I am getting that > dreaded feeling right now. I woke up one day in the spring of this year > realizing that regardless of which of the major political parties prevails > in November, we will be led by the bad guys. We are a nation of > astonishing, appalling military might, and we are about to choose between > leaders who we do not trust with all that power. Even followers of either > of the two majors will sheepishly admit they are not big fans of their > party?s leader, but the other one is worse. Still, plenty of us will openly > admit that these are both very bad choices. > > > > If you read that story, you understand better where I am, and why I am > getting the dreaded feeling described by my German colleague, of having > worked for the bad guys. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From sparge at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 16:58:56 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:58:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:27 PM, spike wrote: > > Indeed sir? How would any such system be free of the same factors we see in the USA? This planet?s collective humanity would evolve power grabbing dictators that would make Evil Emperor Palpatine look like Kermit the Frog by comparison, even ignoring the similar skin tone. Hey, I'm not the one who postulated a world government. :-) The only way to limit government abuses of power is to limit government power. If the power is unlimited, the abuses will be horrendous. The founding fathers of the US apparently tried to devise a system with limited powers, but if that was really their goal then they've failed because federal authority now covers anything it wants to cover. It seems like it ought to be possible to devise a system of truly limited government, but that's above my pay grade. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 17:25:50 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:25:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: If utility is purely about merely maximizing the money you have, then there's a problem, but if being treated equitably is also part of a person's utility, then accepting a unfair payout might lower their utility, no dan Yes, of course. I posted it to poke a little fun at people who think they know how to measure utility.. When I went to law school I learned about the rational man idea - what would he do or think. Then along comes economic theory, which in the older form seems to think that everyone is the same as far as interpreting economic value and such. Some people may think mostly about money and some about equity and some, like those of us on in the group, are ornery and may change our values according to the situation. Just how can Anders group parse that? How do you put all that into equations? Seems pretentious or maybe over-simplifying human behavior. (now I could get an even more complicated response from Anders that I will fail to follow in its entirely) bill w On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Anders wrote: > > I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. > Yes, > > this is what real moral education is about. > > It's been a long time, but I can't remember _any_ moral eduction in > school. Still, I think I made the right choices even without such > education. > > It's a well known story that I was fired in 1972 for refusing to sign > a document certifying some isolation amplifiers for 250,000 hours > MTBF. (The design had shortcomings that made it likely to fail in a > couple of thousand hours.) > > There was an earlier event. When I first started school, I was > offered a job at the engineering research lab. I was to replace > someone who had graduated. He had been working on a project to > measure the solids content in stream water. He was trying to do so by > measuring the drop in capacitance of the muddy water because the > capacitance should fall since water has such a high dielectric > constant. I needed the work, but after reviewing the documents and > seeing the one graph the previous work had produced, it was obvious > they did not know what they were doing. In particular, the > capacitance went up as you added more mud to the water. Pointing this > out to the lab director lost me the job. > > > One should regularly check that one is not working for the bad guys. Or > has > > become one of them. > > Yes. > > Keith > > > > > > > On 2016-08-17 21:57, spike wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] > > > > > > > >>?I am struggling to tone down the political content of my own posts, but > I > >> am thinking about writing a full explanation, after which you read, you > may > >> understand why I keep talking about hearing the footsteps?spike > > > > > > > > > > > > I decided to go ahead and explain some things. > > > > > > > > When I was a young controls engineer just starting out my career, I went > to > > work for a company that did anti-crime technology, which sounded really > > cool, but had very little funding or market, so I was assigned as a TDY > over > > to support a USNavy effort while they tried to sell these early 80s > remote > > controlled flying camera drones (!) We sold zero point zero of the RC > cams, > > and I ended up working with the Navy full time for the next several > years. > > > > > > > > I was in an engineering society in 1985. We had a keynote speaker who I > > will never forget. He was introduced as a retired Boeing engineer who > > became an engineering professor at one of the local schools, then retired > > from that. But he explained in his crisp German accent, that wasn?t how > he > > started. He went to work in 1936 just out of the university for an > aircraft > > company in Augsburg Germany, as a structural engineer on the team led by > > Willy Messerschmitt. > > > > > > > > The war came along; he and his colleagues were busy developing war > > technology, particularly a plane designed around the anticipated jet > engine. > > They had no particular political ideology in general; they were engineers > > and scientists, the math geeks of the day. > > > > > > > > So they came up with a plane and had built some prototypes of the Me262, > > began testing them with those marvelous jet engines. Since that plane > was > > the fastest thing in the air, there was little reason to think anything > > would be coming up from behind. So the engineers designed the 262 as a > > fighter plane, but it could carry bombs aft. > > > > > > > > During this time, which was already way into the war, they got orders > from > > Berlin asking them to see what engineering changes would be needed to use > > the 262 as a bomber. It is difficult to retrofit a fighter as a bomber > > however, for several reasons. The tactic used by the allies to fight an > > ME262 was a head-on guns-ablazin? joust. The allies already knew the > Kraut > > had the option of just shoving the throttles forward and getting out of > > town; they couldn?t catch it. So? head-on attacks. > > > > > > > > The German engineers anticipated this (as German engineers do) and had > armor > > up front with a long slopey nose up there, so that a bullet hitting at an > > oblique angle would likely be deflected. They put the guns up there > too, so > > that if facing a head-on barrage, the guns would keep firing. It was one > > hell of a flying weapon. > > > > > > > > By this time, British bombs began falling on London, and the orders came > in > > to study a bomber version of the ME262, so they did, but soon found out > that > > the expendable parts were all forward. Removing them would make the > > aircraft so tail-heavy, most of the weight would need to be replaced with > > useless ballast. The existing ballast mount was structurally > insufficient > > for the amount needed to rebalance, so they (being clever German > engineers) > > found a way to shorten the tail, reduce aerodynamic surface area which > > reduced its maneuverability, increase the capacity of the bomb bay which > put > > even more weight aft, and so on, but when they were finished, the plane > had > > some big problems: the armor around the pilot was now easily penetrable > from > > any direction, he had little defense in a head-on attack. All he could > do > > was run away quickly in an air battle. > > > > > > > > The engineering team made a report that the ME262 couldn?t be effectively > > retrofitted as a bomber. ?Fortunately, Herr Hitler was an idiot.? (His > > words, not mine, hard to forget after these three decades. > > > > > > > > They received word that Der Fuhrer was coming to the factory. They > assumed > > he was coming to give them a pep talk on their work, but when the haggard > > Fuhrer showed up, he gave no speeches, but rather asked to see the jet > > fighter, and began asking technical questions, specifically: how much > does > > that armor around the pilot weigh, and what do those guns weigh. When > they > > told him, he ordered that it be removed, that the lowered weight be > replaced > > with every bomb they could get aboard the aircraft, even if it had to be > > carried externally (which that aircraft was never designed to do and was > > poorly suited for the task.) They tried to explain the notion of balance > > and how removing a thousand kg of armor might only allow a hundred kg of > > extra bombs. But he did come there to listen, he came there to issue > > orders. He wanted to make a 1940s version of a stealth bomber, which > would > > take off from a forward base in France, fly across the channel all alone, > > unarmored and unarmed except for the bombs, drop the ordnance over London > > and fly back. Everything about that plane was wrong for that mission. > > > > > > > > Hitler was accustomed to hearing Ja vol, heil Hitler, and guys jumping to > > it. He didn?t ask for anyone to point out the insanity of the plan. But > > the young engineers realized that if der Fuhrer was issuing crazy > > nonsensical orders to his premier aircraft designers and not listening to > > their logical objections, he was doing likewise up, down and across the > > entire military. He and at least three others concluded that Hitler was > > crazy, stupid, completely blinded by having arbitrary power, or perhaps > all > > of these, and that the war was lost. This was in 1943. He decided to > try > > to escape. He and one other guy somehow made it to Switzerland where > they > > waited out the war, and later he ended up in the USA, working on > passenger > > airliners for Boeing. > > > > > > > > During his talk, one of the most memorable things was the emotion in this > > man?s voice. He spoke of waking up and realizing to his horror that he > was > > working for the bad guys. So overwhelming was this feeling that he > chose to > > leave his family, his childhood friends, colleagues, everything he had > grown > > to know and love, take a huge risk of getting killed; to not work for the > > bad guys. > > > > > > > > Any American who works in, with or for the military knows what an awesome > > force is at our disposal, and why it is that military discipline is > taken so > > very seriously. We know that power corrupts, and the military wields > > astonishing power. It isn?t a game. I am not even talking about the > nukes; > > I have very little firsthand knowledge of that world, never worked in > it. I > > mean the appalling destructive power of the conventional military. If > the > > US military decides to destroy something, it can make that happen, and it > > will stay destroyed. > > > > > > > > I have been out of that world for several years now, but? I am getting > that > > dreaded feeling right now. I woke up one day in the spring of this year > > realizing that regardless of which of the major political parties > prevails > > in November, we will be led by the bad guys. We are a nation of > > astonishing, appalling military might, and we are about to choose between > > leaders who we do not trust with all that power. Even followers of > either > > of the two majors will sheepishly admit they are not big fans of their > > party?s leader, but the other one is worse. Still, plenty of us will > openly > > admit that these are both very bad choices. > > > > > > > > If you read that story, you understand better where I am, and why I am > > getting the dreaded feeling described by my German colleague, of having > > worked for the bad guys. > > > > > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > > > -- > > Dr Anders Sandberg > > Future of Humanity Institute > > Oxford Martin School > > Oxford University > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 17:55:35 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:55:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > ?> ? > the genes > ? ? > doesn't think at all. ?Yes, and that is their greatest weakness.? > ?> ? > They still tend to > ? ? > maximize utility over evolutionary time (or go extinct). ?Genes don't have to fund the best solution to a problem and because the right mutation cannot be guaranteed to come when needed and because it's too hard to change a standard once it's well established genes almost never find the perfect answer, they just have to be better than competing genes. ? > ?> ? > It's a bleak realization that evolution has wired us up this way. ?But genes aren't the end of the story, the fact that the second half of the 20th century was dramatically less bloody than the first half is reason for hope. ? > ?> ? > it does explain the popularity of one of the candidates this year, ?But we've never had a candidate like Donald Trump, why did we get a trumpian candidate this year? I don't think it was genes I think it was just a unusual confluence of circumstances. Somebody decided to run for president who had money (although probably not nearly as much as he claims) and virtually 100% name recognition and showmanship skills to peddle ideas that were decisive, dramatic and simple (but not simple in a good way). The fact that Trump's ideas were bad ideas and would only make the problems they were supposed to solve worse explains why his strongest demographic is uneducated white men. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 17:53:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:53:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Dave Sill Subject: Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:27 PM, spike > wrote: > >>? Indeed sir? How would any such system be free of the same factors we see in the USA? This planet?s collective humanity would evolve power grabbing dictators that would make Evil Emperor Palpatine look like Kermit the Frog by comparison, even ignoring the similar skin tone. >?Hey, I'm not the one who postulated a world government. :-) Noted, thanks. Imagine such a thing, then feel free to speculate on the outcome. Note that along with the obvious risks are some clear benefits: it would allow everyone to greatly reduce military expenditures and eliminate war, just as the USA has state militias but they don?t cost much and don?t amount to much. They are apparently required by the second amendment to our constitution. That looks to me like a perfectlyclear instruction to maintain a well-regulated militia or citizen army is necessary to the security of a free state. >? If the power is unlimited, the abuses will be horrendous? Truer words are seldom spoken. >?The founding fathers of the US apparently tried to devise a system with limited powers, but if that was really their goal then they've failed because federal authority now covers anything it wants to cover? Dave. Please, my son, please listen to your old Uncle Spike: They didn?t fail. We did. This is all our fault and none of theirs. They succeeded, we failed. >?It seems like it ought to be possible to devise a system of truly limited government, but that's above my pay grade. -Dave On the contrary sir. You have a mind. We all do. This is our pay grade, and our pay is a free nation. So here?s my challenge and my submission for a little design contest. The challenge is to make all elections conform to my FLAVOR requirements: Fair, Legal, Affordable, Verifiable, Overt, Recountable. Solution: of the three types of voting, mail-in ballots, electronic machine voting and paper voting, keep the first and merge the second two. Count and archive the mail-in ballots with both human and video recorded evidence. Then? on election day, have stand-alone electronic machines which communicate with any cheapy inkjet printer. The voter shows up in person, verifies identity by biometric or accepted form of ID with human observers, voter is admitted, uses machine, which communicates only with printer, creates hardcopy which voter examines to verify it printed exactly the way the voter wanted. If not, into the shredder or take it away, make a new one. Voter makes as many ballots as she wants, but can only drop one into the ballot box. FLAVOR: Fair: After all the votes are counted by human operators, we have the option of comparing to the results by mail-in. I don?t see why that would favor one candidate or party over the other, or even suppress third parties, etc. We could even do on-site same-day biometrics for those with no ID. This would eliminate multiple voting and greatly reduces voting by those legally ineligible. Fair game! Legal: there is nothing in the proposed approach would violate any legitimate election principles. We want a secret ballot for obvious reasons; otherwise a voter could be threatened or bribed. We have a current absurdity where it is illegal in some states to take a selfie with the voting machine, for that would enable buying of votes. How do those states figure taking a selfie can be illegal under any circumstances, or that the law itself is not in refulgent violation of the first amendment? With the proposed system, we get the advantages of machine voting (no hanging chads, no ballot-marking ambiguity, special video screens for the handicapped or vision impaired, accommodates write-in candidates and such) but we get none of the disadvantages. Reasoning: the voter can make two or more ballots, selfie the rejects for profit, safety or reputation advantage, submit the one which lets her sleep soundly with a clean conscience. Cool, ja? Affordable: none of this costs much at all. A cheapy printer can be run with an old cell phone, the kind which are now tossed into the trash when the new model comes out. A Chromebook/inkject combination is cheaper than these electronic voting machines, which we should grind to powder and hurl into the sea forthwith. If they were to solicit donations to implement this, I would write a check of four digits, not including the two to the right of the decimal, to make it happen, especially the grinding and discarding the current machines. I would consider it money wisely invested and well-spent. Verifiable: if we wished, the ballots can print out a random 16 byte unique identifier, and the voter could keep a receipt, write down or photograph the number, check later on a website that the number matches the intended result. We could make each vote completely verifiable without risk of compromising identity, such as by keeping a box of those plastic gloves next to the printer so the voter need not even leave traces of DNA on those ballots. Overt: everything here is right out in the open, no sneaky anything, all methods and results are in plain sight, no clever IT guys needed, no mysterious backroom dealing ANYWHERE in this proposed system. Recountable: since every vote counted would come off of paper, and those ballots would be saved and archived in a nuclear bomb-proof vault, we have the option of recounting if there is any reason to do so. This approach meets all the FLAVOR requirements for elections and is so easy to do, even tiny little microscopic spike66 thought of it. We haven?t even yet heard your still better ideas. Question please: Whyyyyyy hasn?t this already been done a long time ago? Hmmmm? Why? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 18:38:35 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:38:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> Message-ID: <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>? why did we get a trumpian candidate this year? I don't think it was genes I think it was just a unusual confluence of circumstances? John K Clark ? John you missed one which is probably far more significant than any of these other factors. Read on please. Back in early summer of 2015, Clinton already had the nomination completely sewed up. No one outside his immediate family had ever heard of Bernie Sanders; there was no credible opposition within the party and the likely Republican was the unpopular Jeb Bush. You can check the archives on the left wing sites and find people suggesting the best approach for lifelong Democrats would be to register as Republicans and vote in the primaries for the most easily-beaten Republican candidate or the candidate most likely to discredit, divide and destroy the Republican party. This is a technique which would make Saul Alinsky proud. The strategy succeeded beyond their wildest expectations, accomplishing all these goals, creating record numbers of new ?Republican? registrations, particularly in those states with closed primaries. However? their own candidate who they already had decided had such a solid lock on the nomination did the same to her own party as her crimes came to light. Oooops, that wasn?t in the script. The email will not stop leaking, not now, not in November, not in December or January. The wrecking ball does not stop bashing away, long after the November election, for the prosecution then goes over to the senate, at which time there is no executive branch cover. Of course, all this will weaken the executive branch and Federal level government in general but there may be a dark lining to that silver cloud. There might be unforeseen negative consequences. Americans may get to find out the answers to a bunch of interesting and scary legal questions, such as? What are the limits of presidential pardons? What happens if crimes are uncovered after the election but were committed before? Does election count as a voter-level pardon of sorts? If so, what about the crimes the voters didn?t know about until after the election? If the voters were not given access to the evidence, is the defacto pardon valid or was it to start with? What if there is an impeachment trial and it splits down party lines as it did last time we had an impeachment trial, but there is plenty of evidence to convict? Are all congress members who vote with the questionably-acquitted official guilty of aiding and abetting? If the senate anticipates a party-line vote and also anticipates losing their current majority, can the current senate vote to impeach an elected official who has not yet been sworn into office? And if that happens, does Tim Caine become the 45 president? If the election is close and it is clear enough that the withholding from the voters of the evidence the FBI currently possesses is widely viewed to have tipped the election, does Tim Caine or does the narrowly defeated Trump get to be president? Does the constitution offer guidance in any of these questions? If not, cannot the Federal legislature proceed without ruling on any of it by the Supreme Court? And if they do, does the court then get the option to reverse the result handed down by the legislature? Or does the law change and the legislative result stand by ex post facto? Or is the legislature tasked with passing its own laws to limit its own power? (Oy, ponder that one please.) If so, is not this a most unique constitutional crisis in American history, where all three branches of government get to play? Is it now perfectly clear why the framers of the constitution would not have unanimously disapproved of the Executive branch controlling the nukes? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 18:45:29 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:45:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> Message-ID: This approach meets all the FLAVOR requirements for elections and is so easy to do, even tiny little microscopic spike66 thought of it. We haven?t even yet heard your still better ideas. spike I see in the news where some states have attempted to make it more difficult for some voters to vote, by enacting all sorts of rules and time limits, etc. MS has done so. Motor voter and all that. I also see in the news the question: why are all these things necessary? There hasn't been a slue of voting irregularities noted anywhere in this state or the others where such laws are attempted. Your response? bill w On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:53 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *Dave Sill > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:27 PM, spike wrote: > > > >>? Indeed sir? How would any such system be free of the same factors we > see in the USA? This planet?s collective humanity would evolve power > grabbing dictators that would make Evil Emperor Palpatine look like Kermit > the Frog by comparison, even ignoring the similar skin tone. > > >?Hey, I'm not the one who postulated a world government. :-) > > Noted, thanks. Imagine such a thing, then feel free to speculate on the > outcome. > > Note that along with the obvious risks are some clear benefits: it would > allow everyone to greatly reduce military expenditures and eliminate war, > just as the USA has state militias but they don?t cost much and don?t > amount to much. They are apparently required by the second amendment to > our constitution. That looks to me like a perfectlyclear instruction to > maintain a well-regulated militia or citizen army is necessary to the > security of a free state. > > >? If the power is unlimited, the abuses will be horrendous? > > Truer words are seldom spoken. > > >?The founding fathers of the US apparently tried to devise a system with > limited powers, but if that was really their goal then they've failed > because federal authority now covers anything it wants to cover? > > Dave. Please, my son, please listen to your old Uncle Spike: They didn?t > fail. We did. This is all our fault and none of theirs. They succeeded, > we failed. > > >?It seems like it ought to be possible to devise a system of truly > limited government, but that's above my pay grade. -Dave > > On the contrary sir. You have a mind. We all do. This is our pay grade, > and our pay is a free nation. > > So here?s my challenge and my submission for a little design contest. > > The challenge is to make all elections conform to my FLAVOR requirements: > Fair, Legal, Affordable, Verifiable, Overt, Recountable. > > Solution: of the three types of voting, mail-in ballots, electronic > machine voting and paper voting, keep the first and merge the second two. > Count and archive the mail-in ballots with both human and video recorded > evidence. Then? on election day, have stand-alone electronic machines which > communicate with any cheapy inkjet printer. The voter shows up in person, > verifies identity by biometric or accepted form of ID with human observers, > voter is admitted, uses machine, which communicates only with printer, > creates hardcopy which voter examines to verify it printed exactly the way > the voter wanted. If not, into the shredder or take it away, make a new > one. Voter makes as many ballots as she wants, but can only drop one into > the ballot box. > > FLAVOR: > > Fair: After all the votes are counted by human operators, we have the > option of comparing to the results by mail-in. I don?t see why that would > favor one candidate or party over the other, or even suppress third > parties, etc. We could even do on-site same-day biometrics for those with > no ID. This would eliminate multiple voting and greatly reduces voting by > those legally ineligible. Fair game! > > Legal: there is nothing in the proposed approach would violate any > legitimate election principles. We want a secret ballot for obvious > reasons; otherwise a voter could be threatened or bribed. We have a > current absurdity where it is illegal in some states to take a selfie with > the voting machine, for that would enable buying of votes. How do those > states figure taking a selfie can be illegal under any circumstances, or > that the law itself is not in refulgent violation of the first amendment? > With the proposed system, we get the advantages of machine voting (no > hanging chads, no ballot-marking ambiguity, special video screens for the > handicapped or vision impaired, accommodates write-in candidates and such) > but we get none of the disadvantages. Reasoning: the voter can make two or > more ballots, selfie the rejects for profit, safety or reputation > advantage, submit the one which lets her sleep soundly with a clean > conscience. Cool, ja? > > Affordable: none of this costs much at all. A cheapy printer can be run > with an old cell phone, the kind which are now tossed into the trash when > the new model comes out. A Chromebook/inkject combination is cheaper than > these electronic voting machines, which we should grind to powder and hurl > into the sea forthwith. If they were to solicit donations to implement > this, I would write a check of four digits, not including the two to the > right of the decimal, to make it happen, especially the grinding and > discarding the current machines. I would consider it money wisely invested > and well-spent. > > Verifiable: if we wished, the ballots can print out a random 16 byte > unique identifier, and the voter could keep a receipt, write down or > photograph the number, check later on a website that the number matches the > intended result. We could make each vote completely verifiable without > risk of compromising identity, such as by keeping a box of those plastic > gloves next to the printer so the voter need not even leave traces of DNA > on those ballots. > > Overt: everything here is right out in the open, no sneaky anything, all > methods and results are in plain sight, no clever IT guys needed, no > mysterious backroom dealing ANYWHERE in this proposed system. > > Recountable: since every vote counted would come off of paper, and those > ballots would be saved and archived in a nuclear bomb-proof vault, we have > the option of recounting if there is any reason to do so. > > > > This approach meets all the FLAVOR requirements for elections and is so > easy to do, even tiny little microscopic spike66 thought of it. We haven?t > even yet heard your still better ideas. > > Question please: Whyyyyyy hasn?t this already been done a long time ago? > Hmmmm? Why? > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 18:53:56 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:53:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4ED10825-996A-44D9-855A-CC26B2EC5D85@gmail.com> On Aug 19, 2016, at 10:53 AM, spike wrote: > >? On Behalf Of Dave Sill > Subject: Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:27 PM, spike wrote: > > > >>? Indeed sir? How would any such system be free of the same factors we see in the USA? This planet?s collective humanity would evolve power grabbing dictators that would make Evil Emperor Palpatine look like Kermit the Frog by comparison, even ignoring the similar skin tone. > > >?Hey, I'm not the one who postulated a world government. :-) > > Noted, thanks. Imagine such a thing, then feel free to speculate on the outcome. > > Note that along with the obvious risks are some clear benefits: it would allow everyone to greatly reduce military expenditures and eliminate war, just as the USA has state militias but they don?t cost much and don?t amount to much. They are apparently required by the second amendment to our constitution. That looks to me like a perfectlyclear instruction to maintain a well-regulated militia or citizen army is necessary to the security of a free state. > > >? If the power is unlimited, the abuses will be horrendous? > > Truer words are seldom spoken. > > >?The founding fathers of the US apparently tried to devise a system with limited powers, but if that was really their goal then they've failed because federal authority now covers anything it wants to cover? > > Dave. Please, my son, please listen to your old Uncle Spike: They didn?t fail. We did. This is all our fault and none of theirs. They succeeded, we failed. > I question whether they all wanted limited powers. Certainly, some of them wanted a government with much more power, one that might rival European powers of that time in scope. See: http://reason.com/archives/2016/01/24/revisiting-the-us-constitution Also, as should be obvious, if you devise a system that's supposed to be self-limiting and it's not, then you have failed, regardless of whether later folks living under it share any blame. The takeaway here should not be that we adore and idolize the designers -- who were only borrowing kludges from other systems -- but that admit a piece of paper -- admittedly, a legalistic compromise written by committee -- is not a good way to limit power. (And, no, it didn't work at limiting power until some time long after the Framers were dead. It expanded power from the start and continued to do so in the immediate decade following Ratification.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 19:12:00 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:12:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 19, 2016 11:08 AM, "spike" wrote: > Solution: of the three types of voting, mail-in ballots, electronic machine voting and paper voting, keep the first and merge the second two. Count and archive the mail-in ballots with both human and video recorded evidence. Then? on election day, have stand-alone electronic machines which communicate with any cheapy inkjet printer. The voter shows up in person, verifies identity by biometric or accepted form of ID with human observers, voter is admitted, uses machine, which communicates only with printer, creates hardcopy which voter examines to verify it printed exactly the way the voter wanted. If not, into the shredder or take it away, make a new one. Voter makes as many ballots as she wants, but can only drop one into the ballot box. You tempt me to hack the "unhackable". ;) In this case? Disappearing ink for the printer, which lasts maybe a few hours once printed. Pre-print the "correct" vote using invisible ink, that fades in after a few hours. There's no "hand" that varies voter by voter; that it was all written by the same printer is as expected. Tweak any electronic records to match. Where the mail-in ballots are a small portion of the total, count them honestly to add enough statistical noise to make the results more believable. As to the thread topic: vote third party. There are enough people who don't vote out of apathy that any nonvote, regardless of what you think your reason is, will be heard by the people that matter as just another apathetic nonvoter. If you want to vote against Clinton and Trump, the only way to do that is to actually vote for someone - anyone - else. No amount of reasoning and logic will change this, just like you can't argue the sky into being yellow. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 19:09:45 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:09:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:45 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote This approach meets all the FLAVOR requirements for elections and is so easy to do, even tiny little microscopic spike66 thought of it. We haven?t even yet heard your still better ideas. spike I see in the news where some states have attempted to make it more difficult for some voters to vote, by enacting all sorts of rules and time limits, etc. MS has done so. Motor voter and all that. I also see in the news the question: why are all these things necessary? There hasn't been a slue of voting irregularities noted anywhere in this state or the others where such laws are attempted. Your response? bill w BillW, how would we know? How do these news agencies who make such claims know election fraud is not currently taking place? What evidence do they offer? If voting regularity is at the machine level how would we catch it or know it is going on? Why is it that we have no means of systematically comparing the voting result from mail-in ballots vs in-person paper voting vs in-person machine voting? If those results disagree, why do they disagree and which favors which party? Where are these laws that make it more difficult for some voters, and what voters are those, and why is it more difficult for those voters and why? Looks to me like a FLAVOR poll would make it easier for all voters legally entitled to cast a vote. With such a system, homeless people could vote, once. One can be homeless in as many states as one wants. I am currently homeless in 49 states, homeful in one. Some people live in RVs, so they can tour the purple states and be homeless in all of them. Nothing explicitly precludes homeless people from voting. FLAVOR-compliant elections would allow the voting to be extended arbitrarily since admission to the ballot box one time would be controlled by biometrics. This would make it easier for legal voters everywhere, easier to cast one vote. Much harder to cast many or cast votes illegally such as in multiple states. By the way, BillW, can you offer me a link to that law you referenced that restricts minorities from voting? Google doesn?t seem to know about it. I also see in the news the question: why are all these things necessary? Hmmm, I will give you a minute to ponder that one. Eh, no I won?t. FLAVOR elections are necessary because WE DON?T TRUST the person likely to be elected this time. We distrust both of them. We distrust the current election process, because it seems to go out of its way to be covert and unverifiable We are being asked to take the word of a party already caught cheating to favor one candidate. We have a mainstream candidate who is already hurling accusations of cheating if he loses, but not if he wins. Well, OK how do we answer him? We can?t. But we can see that a fair FLAVOR-compliant election could easily be designed and implemented universally. It could have been a long time ago, but we didn?t. No one seems to be doing it now, nor are there any plans to do so in the future, for a perfectly understandable reason: the winner has a vested interest in keeping the current system and the loser?s attitude is irrelevant, for he is out of power. Result: dishonesty survives to reproduce, corruption evolves. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 19:37:35 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:37:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> Message-ID: Here is the link to the feds and NC: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/08/11/federal_court_strikes_down_north_carolina_gerrymander.html here is another: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us/federal-appeals-court-strikes-down-north-carolina-voter-id-provision.html Result: dishonesty survives to reproduce, corruption evolves. spike I have no dog in this fight and have no problems with your proposed solutions and am certainly demeaning them as unnecessary. I am in favor of anything that can reduce corruption by political parties. bill w On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:09 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2016 11:45 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] To vote or not to vote > > > > This approach meets all the FLAVOR requirements for elections and is so > easy to do, even tiny little microscopic spike66 thought of it. We haven?t > even yet heard your still better ideas. spike > > > > I see in the news where some states have attempted to make it more > difficult for some voters to vote, by enacting all sorts of rules and time > limits, etc. MS has done so. Motor voter and all that. > > > > I also see in the news the question: why are all these things necessary? > There hasn't been a slue of voting irregularities noted anywhere in this > state or the others where such laws are attempted. > > > > Your response? > > > > bill w > > > > > > BillW, how would we know? How do these news agencies who make such claims > know election fraud is not currently taking place? What evidence do they > offer? If voting regularity is at the machine level how would we catch it > or know it is going on? Why is it that we have no means of systematically > comparing the voting result from mail-in ballots vs in-person paper voting > vs in-person machine voting? If those results disagree, why do they > disagree and which favors which party? Where are these laws that make it > more difficult for some voters, and what voters are those, and why is it > more difficult for those voters and why? > > > > Looks to me like a FLAVOR poll would make it easier for all voters legally > entitled to cast a vote. With such a system, homeless people could vote, > once. One can be homeless in as many states as one wants. I am currently > homeless in 49 states, homeful in one. Some people live in RVs, so they > can tour the purple states and be homeless in all of them. Nothing > explicitly precludes homeless people from voting. FLAVOR-compliant > elections would allow the voting to be extended arbitrarily since admission > to the ballot box one time would be controlled by biometrics. This would > make it easier for legal voters everywhere, easier to cast one vote. Much > harder to cast many or cast votes illegally such as in multiple states. > > > > By the way, BillW, can you offer me a link to that law you referenced that > restricts minorities from voting? Google doesn?t seem to know about it. > > > > I also see in the news the question: why are all these things necessary? > > > > Hmmm, I will give you a minute to ponder that one. Eh, no I won?t. > FLAVOR elections are necessary because WE DON?T TRUST the person likely to > be elected this time. We distrust both of them. We distrust the current > election process, because it seems to go out of its way to be covert and > unverifiable We are being asked to take the word of a party already caught > cheating to favor one candidate. We have a mainstream candidate who is > already hurling accusations of cheating if he loses, but not if he wins. > Well, OK how do we answer him? We can?t. > > > > But we can see that a fair FLAVOR-compliant election could easily be > designed and implemented universally. It could have been a long time ago, > but we didn?t. No one seems to be doing it now, nor are there any plans to > do so in the future, for a perfectly understandable reason: the winner has > a vested interest in keeping the current system and the loser?s attitude is > irrelevant, for he is out of power. > > > > Result: dishonesty survives to reproduce, corruption evolves. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 19:48:26 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:48:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > ?> ? > Edmund Burke > ? ? > quote: > "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to > ? ? > do nothing." > ?I agree, so do something, vote for the only person who has a chance of stopping insanity.? > ?> ? > Ms Clinton, who shares many attitudes with Mr Hoxha > ? [...] ? > ?Clinton is like Hoxha??? ?> ? > It is a perverse triumph of leftoid indoctrination that > ? [...] ? > I pride myself on being resistant to propaganda. ?Apparently your resistance doesn't extend to propaganda coming from places like Fox News, R ush ? ? ?Limbaugh? ? ?or Breitbart ?.? > ?> ? > Why should I lend legitimacy to a system that gave us a > ? ? > choice between Clinton and Trump? > ?Neither needs you help to become legitimate but both need your vote to become president. You can quote Burk as much as you like but the fact remains that like it or not in 3681 hours either Clinton or Trump will receive the nuclear launch codes and become Commander In Chief, and no critical thinker could claim it makes no difference which one of the two does. ? > ?> ? > My interlocutor implied that I am responsible (i.e. could be blamed) > ? ? > for the Bad Things that would happen if I do not vote. To not-vote is > ? ? > still to vote, negatively. ? Yes, deciding ? not to vote (or ? doing something functionally equivalent like voting for ? Johnson ? or Stein) is an action and the second most morally reprehensible action you could take, beaten only by voting for Trump. ?If you refuse to vote and Trump wins then you will share in the blame for the catastrophe that will result, > ?> ? > My answer is that bad things happen when > ? ? > good people do not hang together, not when they fail to vote. > ?You may be a good person and you may be too good to vote for a imperfect candidate, but a nuclear fireball won't care how good you are, it will treat your body exactly the same way it will treat a bad person's body, it will treat both of them like matter. > ?> ? > if everybody was like me, a > ? ? > conscientious objector to electoral participation > ? [...]? > ?Then a strongman? would become dictator. > ?> ? > Hitler or Clinton > ? ? > would have no chance of rising to power. ?In the 1932 election you would have stayed home because you didn't like Hitler or Hindenburg and figured there was no difference between the two. I don't like either one either but I would have figured there was a difference between the two and would have voted for Hindenburg without hesitation. And Hitler lost that election, in later years I would have been proud of myself for helping delay Hitler's rise to power by about a year and given people a little more time to get out of Germany. > ?> ? > If a lof of people were like me, > ? ? > anarcho-capitalism > ? ? > would be a viable strategy. ? It's weird ?. ?Y ou claim to be in favor of ? ? anarcho-capitalism and yet it's Clinton you compare with Hitler the free trade candidate not Trump the anti-free trade candidate ?. ? Trump wants to put restriction on free speech ?,? deport American citizens without trial to Guantanamo ?, and force Apple and everybody else to put backdoors into all electronic products so Big Brother can get around encryption. And it's Trump not Clinton who wants to kill the children of people the government doesn't like and torture them in ways that are "one hell of alot worse than waterboarding " even it we get no usable information from it because "they deserve it". Clinton wants none of those things but it's Clinton whose the great enemy of freedom and ? ? anarcho-capitalism ? not Trump.? It's weird. Oh and by the way, in addition to the above Trump is also a thin skinned conspiracy theory nutcase who's as crazy as a bedbug, and that might not be desirable in a Commander in Chief who in 153 days could end the world as easily as he now sends a tweet. > ?> ? > Be good, don't vote for bad. > ?Be sane, don't vote for insane. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 19 19:53:27 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:53:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: <01aa7c67-1ba1-6a65-36d1-3d2cf47908ef@aleph.se> On 2016-08-19 18:25, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Just how can Anders group parse that? How do you put all that into > equations? Seems pretentious or maybe over-simplifying human > behavior. (now I could get an even more complicated response from > Anders that I will fail to follow in its entirely) Mostly because our equations are about AI. The designers can build AIs to have a particular utility function, and that will be it. Humans are messy and might not be well described even by complex utilities. But at least some AI can be analysed in great detail by this formalism. (I'm actually more interested in neuromorphic systems that borrow their structure and hence also messiness from biology; they will of course at most have approximate utilities.) Note that lacking a utility function does not mean you are irrational. It is just that you may have messy, probabilistic goals that are not known entirely to yourself. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 20:21:18 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:21:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 19, 2016 12:25 PM, "spike" wrote: > Nothing explicitly precludes homeless people from voting. Lack of address to tie to a district often does a good job. But, y'know, every time people raise a stink about individual voting more than once, it always turns out to be a drop in the bucket, with whatever fix being proposed actually doing more to distance the result of the election from what the voters actually voted for (either intentionally, or just because it is a new system that has not been thoroughly - if at all - studied for flaws). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 20:29:56 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:29:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:38 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > Is it now perfectly clear why the framers of the constitution would not > have unanimously disapproved of the Executive branch controlling the nukes? Nukes? It's often difficult to figure out ?exactly ? what the framers ? meant when they wrote ?various things in the constitution ?, but one thing we can be sure of is that when they said "Arms" as in: *"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."* ?they didn't mean AK47's, they couldn't have imagined ?such things , they meant muzzle loading muskets and single shot flintlock pistols. And as for nukes... well come on! But it regardless of what they meant when they wrote the constitution the president is going to retain control of the nukes for the foreseeable future. We know with metaphysical certitude there is only one person that can prevent a madman from having total control over tens of thousands of H-bombs in just 153 days. So I'm voting for that one person because I think H-bombs could have a larger impact on my life than a mail server, even a sloppy mail server. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 20:33:40 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:33:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:55 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Keith Henson > wrote: > >> the genes doesn't think at all. > > Yes, and that is their greatest weakness. Perhaps so, but gene were around a *long* time before they gave rise to creatures who could think even a little. >> They still tend to >> maximize utility over evolutionary time (or go extinct). > > Genes don't have to fund the best solution to a problem and because the > right mutation cannot be guaranteed to come when needed and because it's too > hard to change a standard once it's well established genes almost never > find the perfect answer, they just have to be better than competing genes. In a complex environment, it's hard to find a global optimum. Genes, however, seem to be fairly good at finding the local optimum. >> It's a bleak realization that evolution has wired us up this way. > > But genes aren't the end of the story, the fact that the second half of the > 20th century was dramatically less bloody than the first half is reason for > hope. And this century could be dramatically more bloody than the first half of the last century. I still say it is the genes. They have programed humans to work ourselves up into wars and fight when the future looks bleak. It's true that the last half of the last century was much less bloody, but for the last half of the last century the future looked better than the present for most people. That's what keep "war mode" and related social disruption in the off state. There hasn't been time nor selection pressure to change genes in the last 100 years. Don't forget that the proposed gene selections set us up to fight, but they also have selected us to _not fight_ when we don't have to. The selection against fighting when you don't need to is even stronger than the selection to fight when it's best for the genes to do so. "It's the economy" and perhaps even more important, the future prospects for the economy measured in income per capita. That's why the IRA went out of business. Over a long time, the Irish women cut their birth rate down to close to replacement. With the population close to stable, economic growth got ahead of population growth and the income per capita started up. A brighter future switches off population support for the warriors (IRA) and they went out of business. >> it does explain the popularity of one of the candidates this year, > > But we've never had a candidate like Donald Trump, If you take a less parochial view, they are not uncommon. I don't want to get into Godwin's law, but think about what happened to the Germans in the 20s. Just because a country is highly civilized doesn't mean they can't jump into being barbarians in a heartbeat. > why did we get a trumpian candidate this year? For about 90% of Americans, i.e., all but the top ten percent, their real income has not gone up since the late 70s or early 80s. They have not recovered what they lost in the 2008 recession. The next generation, their kids, are going to have a miserable time. The ones who bought into needing a degree to get ahead are saddled with so much debt that's most of them will never own a home, a lot of them will not have families. There is good reason to view the future as bleak. That turns up the gain on xenophobic memes and people start seeking leaders who they believe (in their xenophobic fugue) can do something about it. > I don't think it was genes I think it was just a > unusual confluence of circumstances. Somebody decided to run for president > who had money (although probably not nearly as much as he claims) and > virtually 100% name recognition and showmanship skills to peddle ideas that > were decisive, dramatic and simple (but not simple in a good way). The fact > that Trump's ideas were bad ideas and would only make the problems they > were supposed to solve worse explains why his strongest demographic is > uneducated white men. It's not just uneducated, but uneducated white men with poor future prospects. The high paying manufacturing jobs are gone, either automated out of existence or moved overseas because low cost shipping has leveled the manufacturing labor market world wide. Back in the 1950 dinky little Prescott, Arizona, at the time less than 10,000 people had a shirt factory. It's long gone. But as to an unusual confluence of circumstances, I agree. However, think about this. 8 years ago Trump tried and went down with hardly a ripple. Of course, the clowns he was up against this time didn't help. Bad as it is in the US, there are places where it's a lot worse. Syria for example. Keith From sparge at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 21:02:12 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:02:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > Nukes? It's often difficult to figure out > ?exactly ? > what the framers > ? meant when they wrote ?various things in > the constitution > ?, but one thing we can be sure of is that when they said "Arms" as in: > > *"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free > State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be > infringed."* > > ?they didn't mean AK47's, they couldn't have imagined ?such things , > they meant muzzle loading muskets and single shot flintlock pistols. And as > for nukes... well come on! > Exactly. Just like freedom of the press can't possibly apply to anything other than the screw presses they had in the 18th century. Radio, TV, Internet... well come on! -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Aug 19 20:56:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:56:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: <03ea01d1fa23$8412a9b0$8c37fd10$@att.net> <03f201d1fa27$d7b9ed90$872dc8b0$@att.net> <00c601d1fa36$8c40f3e0$a4c2dba0$@att.net> <00aa01d1fa42$982d0d90$c88728b0$@att.net> <002701d1fa4d$3fc42520$bf4c6f60$@att.net> Message-ID: <006d01d1fa5c$2092c580$61b85080$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace ? >?Result: dishonesty survives to reproduce, corruption evolves?spike >?I have no dog in this fight ? BillW, on the contrary sir, you do. We all do. All Americans have a dog in this fight, all outside the USA who may be on the receiving end of aggressive military behavior have a dog in this fight. Humanity has a huge pack of dogs in this fight. Government corruption is a bad thing everywhere. It is worse if the government in question has way too many fireworks. >? I am in favor of anything that can reduce corruption by political parties. bill w Thanks man. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 21:18:11 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:18:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> Message-ID: <8C92667C-DBAC-48DD-95D6-7ABB57F58561@gmail.com> On Aug 19, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Dave Sill wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> Nukes? It's often difficult to figure out ?exactly ?what the framers ? meant when they wrote ?various things in the constitution?, but one thing we can be sure of is that when they said "Arms" as in: >> >> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." >> >> ?they didn't mean AK47's, they couldn't have imagined ?such things , they meant muzzle loading muskets and single shot flintlock pistols. And as for nukes... well come on! > > Exactly. Just like freedom of the press can't possibly apply to anything other than the screw presses they had in the 18th century. Radio, TV, Internet... well come on! Right! ;) Let's remember, too, that the quote is from an amendment -- not the original document as ratified and that the amendment and its companions in the Bill of Rights were only added to get the nation to swallow the bitter pill of a much more expansive and powerful central government. (For those who can imagine it, it meant that some people expected the central government to overstep its bounds. They weren't wrong as the subsequent decade -- the 01790s -- shows.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 21:50:06 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:50:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <01aa7c67-1ba1-6a65-36d1-3d2cf47908ef@aleph.se> References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> <01aa7c67-1ba1-6a65-36d1-3d2cf47908ef@aleph.se> Message-ID: Whew. Note that lacking a utility function does not mean you are irrational. It is just that you may have messy, probabilistic goals that are not known entirely to yourself. I'd say that last sentence will apply to every single human being and all their goals. In fact, you could change the last to 'goals that are mostly not known....' and still be correct for large amounts of human motivations. (We in the group, however, know ourselves perfectly.) After thinking about this for awhile (all day), in many instances I prefer 'nonrational' to irrational especially as applied to unconscious drives. bill w -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > On 2016-08-19 18:25, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Just how can Anders group parse that? How do you put all that into > equations? Seems pretentious or maybe over-simplifying human behavior. > (now I could get an even more complicated response from Anders that I will > fail to follow in its entirely) > > > Mostly because our equations are about AI. The designers can build AIs to > have a particular utility function, and that will be it. Humans are messy > and might not be well described even by complex utilities. But at least > some AI can be analysed in great detail by this formalism. > > (I'm actually more interested in neuromorphic systems that borrow their > structure and hence also messiness from biology; they will of course at > most have approximate utilities.) > > Note that lacking a utility function does not mean you are irrational. It > is just that you may have messy, probabilistic goals that are not known > entirely to yourself. > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 23:53:41 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 19:53:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <20160819034701.GA17921@nosyntax.net> <5f9caa15-1518-1102-8b4a-49215ba6d0d8@aleph.se> <00ef01d1fa48$e53414c0$af9c3e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Dave Sill wrote: ?>> ? >> Nukes? It's often difficult to figure out >> ?exactly ? >> what the framers >> ? meant when they wrote ?various things in >> the constitution >> ?, but one thing we can be sure of is that when they said "Arms" as in: >> *"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free >> State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be >> infringed."* >> ?they didn't mean AK47's, they couldn't have imagined ?such things , >> they meant muzzle loading muskets and single shot flintlock pistols. And as >> for nukes... well come on! >> > > ?> ? > Exactly. Just like freedom of the press can't possibly apply to anything > other than the screw presses they had in the 18th century. Radio, TV, > Internet... well come on! > ?Yes it's ambiguous, that's why the Supreme Court is important and I have no patience with ? strict constructionism that maintains being a judge is easy, just read the minds of people who died 200 years ago and do what they meant. Using that philosophy a case could be made that only muzzle loading muskets and single shot flintlock pistols should be allowed, but an equally strong case could be made that every one of the 319 million Americans should be allowed to own and control their own individual H-bomb. And yes you're right, a case could be made that freedom of the press must involve a press, you're allowed to use a screw and lead type to press ink into paper but that's all you're allowed. And indeed Robert Bork, who Reagan tried to get on the Supreme Court and almost succeeded, was a strict constructionist and maintained that freedom of speech only meant freedom of political speech, and scientific, literary, philosophical, and artistic speech are protected only to the degree it "inspires and informs" political speech (Bork was OK with religious speech because that was specifically mentioned). But an equally strong strict constructionist case could be made that you're allowed to say anything you like on Radio TV the Internet or anywhere else. So the reality of the situation is the Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means, thus I would prefer a judge who says it means all forms of speech not just political speech are allowed over every medium, but individual ownership of H-bombs is not allowed. I shudder to think of the sort of idiot judge Donald Trump would appoint to inform us what that document means. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 00:11:34 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:11:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <01aa7c67-1ba1-6a65-36d1-3d2cf47908ef@aleph.se> References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> <01aa7c67-1ba1-6a65-36d1-3d2cf47908ef@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: ?> ? > Note that lacking a utility function does not mean you are irrational. It > is just that you may have messy, probabilistic goals that are not known > entirely to yourself. > ?I agree, and that messiness could be an advantage. If your utility function is clear and neat as a pin and it's to maximize your obedience to me, and I tell you to find an even integer greater than 2 that can not be expressed as the sum of two primes then you could be in big trouble if such a number does not exist. No intelligent entity has a inflexible goal that can never be changed, not even the goal for self preservation. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Aug 19 21:37:55 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> Message-ID: <3db1e43e-affc-a393-6819-1eb86cccb10b@aleph.se> On 2016-08-19 17:42, Keith Henson wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Anders wrote: >> I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. Yes, >> this is what real moral education is about. > It's been a long time, but I can't remember _any_ moral eduction in > school. Still, I think I made the right choices even without such > education. School is often a hindrance for education. What I meant by moral education is learning to be virtuous; sometimes by hearing an important lesson like from the engineer, sometimes by taking a stand like you about the certification or the capacitance. I think Aristotle was right on the money in the Nichomachean ethics: we should strive to be excellent people, and the way to be virtuous is by learning to act in virtuous ways. This is not something you learn by hearing good arguments, but by doing the right things (or failing, and trying harder again). This kind of virtue ethics is IMHO limited, so you may want to figure out your moral system using more modern approaches or thinking really hard about who you want to be, but there is a key truth to that setting down good habits can make doing the right choices easier and more natural. I have just spent the entire evening adding an awkward correction factor to a graph in a paper. It is handling the difference in star density inside the Milky Way and in the universe at large, but the number gets cube-rooted and the overall function is plotted on a log-scale so the difference is minimal: if you compare with and without you see a difference, but nobody would really notice the flaw if I left it out. But I would know I had fudged my calculations, or more correctly, chosen some recreation over providing the best scientific analysis of the question at hand. There is a professional ethics in science, and I want to be good at the sane parts of it. Hence late evening wrestling with curve fitting. This experience is leaving neural traces that likely will make me a bit more conscientious as a researcher in the future. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 14:00:42 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 07:00:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question Message-ID: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Anders >> ... Still, I think I made the right choices even without such education... Keith >...School is often a hindrance for education... -- Dr Anders Sandberg _______________________________________________ Public schools are not allowed to offer ethical or moral guidance in our times. On a topic related to that but distinct enough that I chose to change the subject line, I have some observations of current public school I would share. My son started fifth grade last week. The teacher asked for the students to bring their parents to an evening meeting to teach the parents how the new Google Classroom software works. It was one pleasant surprise after another. For instance: There are 29 students in the class; 24 showed up with at least one parent and plenty with both, so already over 80% participation in an after-school event. There were enough computers that all students had one, and there were plenty of spares should one of them conk. I still don't know who donated the money to get those, about 40 HP Powerbooks and a charging rack just for that one classroom; I think Google and Microsloth may have done that. I want to write a letter of gratitude and assurance that was money well-spent. The curriculum they are using is called Google Classroom, which might be described as a pumped-up and filled-out version of Sal Khan's excellent Khan Academy. KA is more science/math/technology oriented, and ooooh Khan is good; he did such a fine job on that. But Google Classroom has the Common Core stuff in there and a lot of broadly focused (defocused?) material on "language arts" and "literature" and "social studies" and such as that, all that useless non-science and non-math silliness we geeks were forced to endure with such suffering and longing to get out of there and get back to the real learning, the kind with actual equations in it. You know what I am talking about. This Google Classroom somehow makes vaguely bearable even those "fields" of "study" which have no actual equations, those tenuous disciplines which are forced to express their principles by reliance on "nouns" and "verbs" and such flimsy constructs. I scarcely consider any human endeavor which resists being coded into software and which has no equations a legitimate use of the human mind. Or if so, it strains to qualify for its own term with the suffix "-ology." I tend to consider all such ventures better lumped together under the term "sports" but I must qualify even that, for most sports are now delightfully mathematized. They should be considered with the kinds of sports where a panel of human judges hold up numbers at the end of the performance (he said with the accompanying dismissive hand gesture.) But hey, I started out a geek and it got even better from there. I know I am a fortunate man, born into fortunate times. The best part of this curriculum is that it appears to be completely open-ended. None of it depends on a teacher or a class of similarly-aged compatriots; the student progresses as fast and as far as ambition, talent and drive will take her. The education these modern students are getting is so far superior to anything my colleagues and I were offered, the two situations nearly defy direct comparison. Or if such comparison is attempted, a dissatisfying and suboptimal summary is derived, such as: "That sucks, this does not." While succinct and insightful, the comparison lacks constructive descriptive power. It will be fun to watch what this cohort will achieve. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 14:14:14 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 09:14:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: <3db1e43e-affc-a393-6819-1eb86cccb10b@aleph.se> References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> <3db1e43e-affc-a393-6819-1eb86cccb10b@aleph.se> Message-ID: School is often a hindrance for education. What I meant by moral education is learning to be virtuous; sometimes by hearing an important lesson like from the engineer, sometimes by taking a stand like you about the certification or the capacitance. anders Here is a story I just shared with a friend: When a man came to my house and told me that my dogs had been trashing his garden and threatened to shoot them, I lit up and told him that I'd burn his house down. He turned and walked away while I told him that if he shot my dogs he'd be in deep shit. He was about twice my size and looked very threatening, but I paid no attention to that. If I had been asked beforehand what I would have done I am not at all sure that I would have successfully predicted my behavior in the real situation. Ditto being in combat. Would I be a hero, a wimp? No idea. And neither does anyone else. The guy went home and called the deputy sheriff on me. He was really shaken. Did I act morally? Questionable, certainly. But given the situation beforehand I don't think that I would have predicted that I'd act like I did. Far from it. He really got me angry. Being angry and combative, or fearful like in combat, can veto all the ethics you learned from Aristotle or just by thinking for year and years. You remember the Kitty Genovese story? It's about a woman who was killed on a city street while others watched and did nothing, not even call the police. Psych students told that story said that they would have done something, but many repetitions of that done in experiments on city streets with hidden cameras show that extremely few people do anything to help. If a man was sprawled on a street would you assume he was drunk and pass on by? Just about everybody does. Putting in answers on a paper and pencil test of moral thinking and behavior can be totally uncorrelated with real life behavior. That's one big problem with the current favorite: would you throw a switch to divert a train and kill one person while saving five? Not a real situation and maybe, again, uncorrelated with action done in a real one. bill w On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-08-19 17:42, Keith Henson wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Anders wrote: >> >>> I was deeply moved by Spike's story about the Messerschmitt engineer. >>> Yes, >>> this is what real moral education is about. >>> >> It's been a long time, but I can't remember _any_ moral eduction in >> school. Still, I think I made the right choices even without such >> education. >> > > School is often a hindrance for education. What I meant by moral education > is learning to be virtuous; sometimes by hearing an important lesson like > from the engineer, sometimes by taking a stand like you about the > certification or the capacitance. > > I think Aristotle was right on the money in the Nichomachean ethics: we > should strive to be excellent people, and the way to be virtuous is by > learning to act in virtuous ways. This is not something you learn by > hearing good arguments, but by doing the right things (or failing, and > trying harder again). This kind of virtue ethics is IMHO limited, so you > may want to figure out your moral system using more modern approaches or > thinking really hard about who you want to be, but there is a key truth to > that setting down good habits can make doing the right choices easier and > more natural. > > I have just spent the entire evening adding an awkward correction factor > to a graph in a paper. It is handling the difference in star density inside > the Milky Way and in the universe at large, but the number gets cube-rooted > and the overall function is plotted on a log-scale so the difference is > minimal: if you compare with and without you see a difference, but nobody > would really notice the flaw if I left it out. But I would know I had > fudged my calculations, or more correctly, chosen some recreation over > providing the best scientific analysis of the question at hand. There is a > professional ethics in science, and I want to be good at the sane parts of > it. Hence late evening wrestling with curve fitting. This experience is > leaving neural traces that likely will make me a bit more conscientious as > a researcher in the future. > > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 14:48:13 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 09:48:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> Message-ID: The education these modern students are getting is so far superior to anything my colleagues and I were offered spike Sounds great. My question is: how much time is spent with a computer and how much with a live teacher? There is no give and take with a computer (or a very limited amount of it), and I found that the personal opinions of my teachers, while I may disagree with them, were important to me, and still are. I also learned how to ask the right questions in the right ways. If the teacher is just standing there watching 40 students go at 40 different speeds, I'll bet she wishes she had gone into some other profession. bill w bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 9:00 AM, spike wrote: > > >... On Behalf Of Anders > > >> ... Still, I think I made the right choices even without such > education... Keith > > >...School is often a hindrance for education... > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > _______________________________________________ > > > Public schools are not allowed to offer ethical or moral guidance in our > times. > > On a topic related to that but distinct enough that I chose to change the > subject line, I have some observations of current public school I would > share. > > My son started fifth grade last week. The teacher asked for the students > to > bring their parents to an evening meeting to teach the parents how the new > Google Classroom software works. It was one pleasant surprise after > another. For instance: > > There are 29 students in the class; 24 showed up with at least one parent > and plenty with both, so already over 80% participation in an after-school > event. > > There were enough computers that all students had one, and there were > plenty > of spares should one of them conk. I still don't know who donated the > money > to get those, about 40 HP Powerbooks and a charging rack just for that one > classroom; I think Google and Microsloth may have done that. I want to > write a letter of gratitude and assurance that was money well-spent. > > The curriculum they are using is called Google Classroom, which might be > described as a pumped-up and filled-out version of Sal Khan's excellent > Khan > Academy. KA is more science/math/technology oriented, and ooooh Khan is > good; he did such a fine job on that. But Google Classroom has the Common > Core stuff in there and a lot of broadly focused (defocused?) material on > "language arts" and "literature" and "social studies" and such as that, all > that useless non-science and non-math silliness we geeks were forced to > endure with such suffering and longing to get out of there and get back to > the real learning, the kind with actual equations in it. You know what I > am > talking about. > > This Google Classroom somehow makes vaguely bearable even those "fields" of > "study" which have no actual equations, those tenuous disciplines which are > forced to express their principles by reliance on "nouns" and "verbs" and > such flimsy constructs. I scarcely consider any human endeavor which > resists being coded into software and which has no equations a legitimate > use of the human mind. Or if so, it strains to qualify for its own term > with the suffix "-ology." I tend to consider all such ventures better > lumped together under the term "sports" but I must qualify even that, for > most sports are now delightfully mathematized. They should be considered > with the kinds of sports where a panel of human judges hold up numbers at > the end of the performance (he said with the accompanying dismissive hand > gesture.) But hey, I started out a geek and it got even better from there. > I know I am a fortunate man, born into fortunate times. > > The best part of this curriculum is that it appears to be completely > open-ended. None of it depends on a teacher or a class of similarly-aged > compatriots; the student progresses as fast and as far as ambition, talent > and drive will take her. > > The education these modern students are getting is so far superior to > anything my colleagues and I were offered, the two situations nearly defy > direct comparison. Or if such comparison is attempted, a dissatisfying and > suboptimal summary is derived, such as: "That sucks, this does not." While > succinct and insightful, the comparison lacks constructive descriptive > power. > > It will be fun to watch what this cohort will achieve. > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 15:01:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 08:01:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rocket graveyard Message-ID: <001901d1faf3$c60be400$5223ac00$@att.net> Here's a fun article about a discovery of some old-time shipwrecks off Cape Canaveral. http://www.livescience.com/55795-colonial-age-shipwrecks-found-off-florida-c oast.html Here's the reason why it caught my attention. Comment from the article: Rocket graveyard Pritchett explained that his company had permits from the state of Florida to explore seven areas off the coast of Cape Canaveral, where the wrecks were found - an area littered with debris from rocket test launches at the U.S. Air Force base at Cape Canaveral, southeast of NASA's Kennedy Space Center. "We've found hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of U.S. Air Force rockets that they were testing from 1948 forwards, and also shrimp boats, airplane engines, airplanes, " Pritchett said. "We have found some of the actual rocket engines, and lots of rocket tubes - some of these things are 30, 40 feet long," he said. "Some are sticking halfway out on the surface, or sticking straight up out of the sand - there are literally thousands of them out there. We GPS and photograph everything we find, and we turn that stuff over to the U.S. Air Force, because one day, it will be valuable to someone for a historical reason." One of my childhood friend's family had a boat; they enjoyed going out fishing off Cape Canaveral on weekends. Theirs was one of the unusual non-rocket non-space program families who lived in the area: his father was an accountant rather than a space nomad like nearly everyone else in Titusville. This explains why their family could afford a boat and an RV. One day he asked if I really knew rockets as well as I talked. I didn't, I admitted. Assuming it was false modesty on my part, he invited me to go out on their boat to see what they thought was a piece of a rocket from the old days, late 40s perhaps when the Army air force was using Cape Canaveral as a test range for the early multi-stage rockets, the jazzy new liquid fueled rockets and such, just after the war. The rocket stage his family discovered was in shallow water a few miles off the coast. Like a silly fool, I passed up that opportunity. In that area, there was no need to go to the sea to look at old rocket stages, for there was an excellent museum nearby where they had pristine examples. Those museums are still there to this day. The local high school had a rocket out front which they kept as a unique lawn ornament (not kidding.) Like most opportunities, it knocked but once and then only lightly. I sometimes wonder what commonplace junk will someday be interesting artifacts to whatever comes next. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 15:34:12 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 10:34:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] rocket graveyard In-Reply-To: <001901d1faf3$c60be400$5223ac00$@att.net> References: <001901d1faf3$c60be400$5223ac00$@att.net> Message-ID: I sometimes wonder what commonplace junk will someday be interesting artifacts to whatever comes next. spike You do know that there are groups, presumably archaeology students and prof, studying current garbage piles? I guess they said: why wait? bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 10:01 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > Here?s a fun article about a discovery of some old-time shipwrecks off > Cape Canaveral. > > > > http://www.livescience.com/55795-colonial-age-shipwrecks- > found-off-florida-coast.html > > > > Here?s the reason why it caught my attention. Comment from the article: > > > > > > *Rocket graveyard* > > Pritchett explained that his company had permits from the state of Florida > to explore seven areas off the coast of Cape Canaveral, where the wrecks > were found ? an area littered with debris from rocket test launches > at > the U.S. Air Force base at Cape Canaveral, southeast of NASA's Kennedy > Space Center. > > "We've found hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of U.S. Air Force rockets > that they were testing from 1948 forwards, and also shrimp boats, airplane > engines, airplanes, " Pritchett said. > > "We have found some of the actual rocket engines, and lots of rocket tubes > ? some of these things are 30, 40 feet long," he said. "Some are sticking > halfway out on the surface, or sticking straight up out of the sand ? there > are literally thousands of them out there. We GPS and photograph everything > we find, and we turn that stuff over to the U.S. Air Force, because one > day, it will be valuable to someone for a historical reason." > > One of my childhood friend?s family had a boat; they enjoyed going out > fishing off Cape Canaveral on weekends. Theirs was one of the unusual > non-rocket non-space program families who lived in the area: his father was > an accountant rather than a space nomad like nearly everyone else in > Titusville. This explains why their family could afford a boat and an RV. > > > > One day he asked if I really knew rockets as well as I talked. I didn?t, > I admitted. Assuming it was false modesty on my part, he invited me to go > out on their boat to see what they thought was a piece of a rocket from the > old days, late 40s perhaps when the Army air force was using Cape Canaveral > as a test range for the early multi-stage rockets, the jazzy new liquid > fueled rockets and such, just after the war. The rocket stage his family > discovered was in shallow water a few miles off the coast. > > > > Like a silly fool, I passed up that opportunity. In that area, there was > no need to go to the sea to look at old rocket stages, for there was an > excellent museum nearby where they had pristine examples. Those museums > are still there to this day. The local high school had a rocket out front > which they kept as a unique lawn ornament (not kidding.) Like most > opportunities, it knocked but once and then only lightly. > > > > I sometimes wonder what commonplace junk will someday be interesting > artifacts to whatever comes next. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Sat Aug 20 16:42:36 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 09:42:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5ca6e810-0590-8f0e-096f-66bba1cbc570@mydruthers.com> Spike wrote: > On a topic related to that but distinct enough that I chose to change the > subject line, I have some observations of current public school I would > share. > > My son started fifth grade last week. The teacher asked for the students to > bring their parents to an evening meeting to teach the parents how the new > Google Classroom software works. It was one pleasant surprise after > another. Spike, Would you like me to forward your observations to the appropriate people inside Google? I'm sure they'd appreciate it. And if (now or later) you have any more pointed observations or suggestions for improvement, I'll be happy to forward those as well. Chris -- protecting privacy in the computer age is like trying to change a tire on a moving car. --Colin Bennett Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 17:21:49 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 13:21:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Keith Henson wrote: ?> ? > Perhaps so, but gene were around a *long* time before they gave rise > ? ? > to creatures who could think even a little. > ?Until it succeeded in inventing brains after 3 billion years of effort Evolution was the only way to make complex things.? ? But times change.? ?> ? > this century could be dramatically more bloody than the first half > ? ? > of the last century. ?There is certainly the potential for that, and that's why it's important that the person in charge of H-bombs be knowledgeable about world events, have a thick skin and even temperament, ?not be a sucker for conspiracy theories, and make life or death decisions based on facts not gut instincts or invisible men in the sky. It would also be helpful if that person was not crazy. > ?> ? > but think about what happened to the > ? ? > Germans in the 20s. Just because a country is highly civilized > ? ? > doesn't mean they can't jump into being barbarians in a heartbeat. > ?I hope you won't have another example of that in 5 months.? > ?> ? > For about 90% of Americans, i.e., all but the top ten percent, their > ? ? > real income has not gone up since the late 70s or early 80s. They > ? ? > have not recovered what they lost in the 2008 recession. ?Yes. I'm a Libertarian but what you say above is true and Libertarians ignore that fact at their peril. In 2016 the richest 62 people on the planet had as much money as the poorest 3.5 billion people, as recently as 2014 it took 13 more, back then it took 85 people to equal the poorest half of the human population. I think it's fair to say that one way or another this trend will *NOT* continue. If I was one of those 62 hyper rich people and had a brain in my head I'd try to close that huge gap or at least slow its rate of growth, and I'd do it even if I didn't give a damn about other people and was only interested in myself because I'd know if I didn't it would only be a matter of time before I'd lose my head. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 17:50:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 10:50:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:48 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question >>?The education these modern students are getting is so far superior to anything my colleagues and I were offered spike >?If the teacher is just standing there watching 40 students go at 40 different speeds, I'll bet she wishes she had gone into some other profession. bill w BillW, very much to the contrary sir. The teachers loooove this system. They rave in unprecedented unison. I have yet to hear a disparaging comment about it, even in private. Reason: teachers, especially in grades about 5 and 6, have a huge problem on their hands. By that time, the students have spread so far in their abilities, it becomes very difficult to give many of them a meaningful education. Think back on your own least useful years in school, the biggest time waste. Good chance it was those two grades, ja? Reasoning: starting in Junior High they separate the students according to their level and they can take the brainy classes or the sloth classes. In first and second grades, the kids are all young enough they haven?t had time to diverge much in ability. But in that transition, fifth and sixth grades, the students have diverged so wildly, Google Classroom is a gift from the education gods. I see this divergence in my work with the cub scouts. When they were aged 6 years, it was easy to teach them. Now that they are 10, the sloths struggle and the eagles soar. The eagles have already mastered all the skills long since and begin to lose interest, but we leaders struggle and grind just to get the sloths to the next rank. The older end of cub scouting is waaaay more difficult than the younger end. For instance? in my own son?s current classroom are students struggling to master long division. But Isaac finished the first of Khan Academy?s calculus courses along with all its prerequisites, before he blew out ten birthday candles. He is working on the second KA calculus series (integrals) while some of his compatriots scarcely know how many horizontal lines are in an equal sign. Oy. This teacher is smart as a whip; oh she is good, I do think the world of her. But she has no clue what a differential is, or what it does, or how to derive one from a polynomial, or what to do with it if Isaac handed her the answer. But now: no worries, she gets off the runway, the eagles soar, her time is free to help the strugglers, everybody wins. BillW, question please, my professor friend: how the heck is a fifth grade teacher expected to manage that? How would you? I?ll tell you how I would do it: run away! Flee before this intractable problem like terrified foot-soldiers in Monte Python?s Holy Grail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FPELc1wEvk Your homework sir, if I may presume to assign: view Python?s Holy Grail in its entirety. Heh, just kidding. Every proper nerd can already recite the script from that geek classic. It was a teenage rite of passage for those of us whose chances of getting actual attention from the opposite sex ranged from zero to somewhat less than that. Your homework sir, if I may presume to assign: go into any Khan Academy video (it?s free, they are all ten minutes or less) choose at random any video on any topic, view it. Then share with us any newly-acquired insights, not on the topic or content of the video itself but rather the impact of the availability of such tools on education in general and the longer term impact it is likely to have on colleges and society in general. Doooo iiiiiiit. Then please comment upon your comment above, in light of the modern education philosophy: a teacher should be a guide on the side rather than a sage on the stage. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 18:48:57 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 13:48:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> Message-ID: Then please comment upon your comment above, in light of the modern education philosophy: a teacher should be a guide on the side rather than a sage on the stage. spike I would have quit and gone into marketing. Example: my chairman asked if I would like the department to buy some statistics videos by some well-known teacher. My answer was that they could come in handy if I were to go out sick for some time, but otherwise I'd prefer to teach my classes myself. In contrast to you and your son's example. these Ss were all at the same level re stat, so I wasn't holding anyone back. (re that, I'd take your son out of a class of Ss some of whom could not do simple algebra (if you did not have the Google classroom). Also, I would often add material to the class (that was explicitly not tested on) that was for the upper Ss. That's not possible in the G classroom. *Most importantly, I'd lose the personal contact with the students and they would lose theirs with me.* What you describe is what I experienced in grad school (well, sort of, since everyone viewed the same thing): I came into the class, took roll, and turned on the TV. I handed out tests and picked them up. Period, end of teaching assignment. Where's the fun in that? Where's the creativity? Now you must remember this, a kiss is still a kiss......ooops. I was a college teacher, mainly of upper level classes (we had no grad program), and so what goes on and what needs to go on in the 7th grade is a mystery to me. Too, I taught psychology, an area no one had any experience in at all, in stark contract to your son and math. If I were teaching now, I could conceive of this: Ss get a DVD at the beginning of the semester and can go at their own speed and take tests any time they want to, all in the first week of class if they're geniuses. But they would still have to come to class and get my opinions and views on everything and perhaps straighten out stuff they got wrong on the tests which they did not understand even with repeated viewings of the DVD. I could adapt to that. But what you seem to describe is a teacher who is little more than a secretary, standing aside and taking roll and keeping order and doing very little actual teaching. Boring boring boring. Not worth being paid more than a waitress. bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 12:50 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:48 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question > > > > > >>?The education these modern students are getting is so far superior to > anything my colleagues and I were offered spike > > > > >?If the teacher is just standing there watching 40 students go at 40 > different speeds, I'll bet she wishes she had gone into some other > profession. > > > > bill w > > > > > > > > BillW, very much to the contrary sir. The teachers loooove this system. > They rave in unprecedented unison. I have yet to hear a disparaging > comment about it, even in private. > > > > Reason: teachers, especially in grades about 5 and 6, have a huge problem > on their hands. By that time, the students have spread so far in their > abilities, it becomes very difficult to give many of them a meaningful > education. > > > > Think back on your own least useful years in school, the biggest time > waste. Good chance it was those two grades, ja? Reasoning: starting in > Junior High they separate the students according to their level and they > can take the brainy classes or the sloth classes. In first and second > grades, the kids are all young enough they haven?t had time to diverge much > in ability. But in that transition, fifth and sixth grades, the students > have diverged so wildly, Google Classroom is a gift from the education gods. > > > > I see this divergence in my work with the cub scouts. When they were aged > 6 years, it was easy to teach them. Now that they are 10, the sloths > struggle and the eagles soar. The eagles have already mastered all the > skills long since and begin to lose interest, but we leaders struggle and > grind just to get the sloths to the next rank. The older end of cub > scouting is waaaay more difficult than the younger end. > > > > For instance? in my own son?s current classroom are students struggling to > master long division. But Isaac finished the first of Khan Academy?s > calculus courses along with all its prerequisites, before he blew out ten > birthday candles. He is working on the second KA calculus series > (integrals) while some of his compatriots scarcely know how many horizontal > lines are in an equal sign. Oy. > > > > This teacher is smart as a whip; oh she is good, I do think the world of > her. But she has no clue what a differential is, or what it does, or how > to derive one from a polynomial, or what to do with it if Isaac handed her > the answer. But now: no worries, she gets off the runway, the eagles soar, > her time is free to help the strugglers, everybody wins. > > > > BillW, question please, my professor friend: how the heck is a fifth grade > teacher expected to manage that? How would you? I?ll tell you how I would > do it: run away! Flee before this intractable problem like terrified > foot-soldiers in Monte Python?s Holy Grail: > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FPELc1wEvk > > > > Your homework sir, if I may presume to assign: view Python?s Holy Grail > in its entirety. > > > > Heh, just kidding. Every proper nerd can already recite the script from > that geek classic. It was a teenage rite of passage for those of us whose > chances of getting actual attention from the opposite sex ranged from zero > to somewhat less than that. > > > > Your homework sir, if I may presume to assign: go into any Khan Academy > video (it?s free, they are all ten minutes or less) choose at random any > video on any topic, view it. Then share with us any newly-acquired > insights, not on the topic or content of the video itself but rather the > impact of the availability of such tools on education in general and the > longer term impact it is likely to have on colleges and society in > general. Doooo iiiiiiit. > > > > Then please comment upon your comment above, in light of the modern > education philosophy: a teacher should be a guide on the side rather than a > sage on the stage. > > > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 18:52:15 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 13:52:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] preaching to the choir - re fat Message-ID: I know most of you have adopted a diet similar to what these recommend, but I thought I'd provide these links (within the link) for you to share with those who need some convincing. bill w > http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2014/12/29/is-coconut-oil- healthful-or-hazardous/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+Newsletter&utm_ campaign=1b87772a66-Health-Headlines-Email+8%2F19%2F16& utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-1b87772a66-214968749&ct=t(Health_ Headlines_8_19_16)&mc_cid=1b87772a66&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 19:21:37 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 12:21:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom In-Reply-To: <5ca6e810-0590-8f0e-096f-66bba1cbc570@mydruthers.com> References: <5ca6e810-0590-8f0e-096f-66bba1cbc570@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: <012501d1fb18$133c97a0$39b5c6e0$@att.net> > On Behalf Of Chris Hibbert Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom Spike wrote: > On a topic related to that but distinct enough that I chose to change > the subject line, I have some observations of current public school I > would share. > > My son started fifth grade last week. The teacher asked for the > students to bring their parents to an evening meeting to teach the > parents how the new Google Classroom software works. It was one > pleasant surprise after another. Spike, Would you like me to forward your observations to the appropriate people inside Google? I'm sure they'd appreciate it. And if (now or later) you have any more pointed observations or suggestions for improvement, I'll be happy to forward those as well. Chris -- Hi Chris, anything I post on ExI can be shared with anyone, no permission necessary. I am an open sort: I have posted details of my medical history on ExI. Oh wait... that was an accident... {8-/ {8^D Sure excellent, I am pleased to have a contact at Google. I do have some info to share, but right now I gotta scoot. I don't know if the ExI list would be interested in that. I will post to your email @ if I have your permish. Later! spike From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 19:45:08 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 12:45:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> Message-ID: <013501d1fb1b$5c125890$143709b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:49 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question Then please comment upon your comment above, in light of the modern education philosophy: a teacher should be a guide on the side rather than a sage on the stage. spike I would have quit and gone into marketing. Example: my chairman asked if I would like the department to buy some statistics videos by some well-known teacher. ? bill w Ah OK BillW. I understand now, and should have specified making observations from the students? point of view rather than the teacher?s. If you know any fifth and sixth grade teachers, feel free to invite their views on this matter. There is a reason why I suggested viewing a KA video: the format of a ten minute lecture immediately followed by exercises on that topic. I see this as a far more efficient and effective means of teaching many if not most topics than the classroom structure mandated by practicalities. We have the students gather in a particular place and particular time at great expense and effort in many cases, give them an hour lecture, then off they go to do the homework. But concentration spans are generally shorter than that and getting steadily shorter. So, the Khan Academy format offers ten minute lectures interspersed with approximately twenty minutes of practice and a series of mastery assessments. This really works. Another observation please, one I might share with Google, or Chris can pass it along if he wishes. We remember our own education, but allow me to focus please on an area I know better than the others: mathematics. Plenty of us here are engineers or software developers or some kind of math geek. How many have ever been on a project where it was design by committee, but the committee was made up of individuals, egos, rivalries, they never went out and talked shop, or for whatever reason the members didn?t like each other much or didn?t work together well as a team? Ja, most of us have at one point or another. OK, how many were satisfied with the final product? Ja, none of us were. No one on that team was satisfied, and we could all imagine a better one. The product lacks cohesiveness. The pieces don?t work all that well together and we can all easily see wasted effort everywhere in that design. Traditional education using traditional methods is like that. A mathematics curriculum is designed by a dozen or more different people, all with their own ideas of what is important, each with their own focus, each with a vague idea the student is shooting for college calculus perhaps, but the end product is really filled with gaps, over-writes, redos, wasted effort, wasted time, none of it really the fault of school or the curriculum designers. Now consider the alternative: one person who has a clear vision gets to design the entire curriculum from early grades up through college. She knows the skills the student must master to get to the next point on the continuum. The entire process is cohesive. Result: a sharp motivated student can get from basic addition to calculus in four years rather than the usual twelve, and once they do, they know everything in between much better and can use it far more effectively. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Aug 20 20:09:35 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 21:09:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <029201d1f8c9$f7e749a0$e7b5dce0$@att.net> <3db1e43e-affc-a393-6819-1eb86cccb10b@aleph.se> Message-ID: <10095d77-8a0b-657c-1a4a-09dac9e5ca65@aleph.se> On 2016-08-20 15:14, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Did I act morally? Questionable, certainly. But given the situation > beforehand I don't think that I would have predicted that I'd act like > I did. Far from it. He really got me angry. Being angry and > combative, or fearful like in combat, can veto all the ethics you > learned from Aristotle or just by thinking for year and years. Aristotle would point out that a courageous man is a man that does not let the fear (or anger) get the better of him: whether he consciously remember ethics lectures is not interesting, what matters is what he does and that he does it well. And that he learns from the experience. Now, one reason virtue ethics is not super-popular is that it actually doesn't give much advice on what you ought to be doing while being courageous. The courageous gang member or soldier in the evil overlord's army may be just as courageous as the knight or policeman, yet do very different things (there are various saves in the virtue ethics literature, of course). > You remember the Kitty Genovese story? It's about a woman who was > killed on a city street while others watched and did nothing, not even > call the police. Psych students told that story said that they would > have done something, but many repetitions of that done in experiments > on city streets with hidden cameras show that extremely few people do > anything to help. > > If a man was sprawled on a street would you assume he was drunk and > pass on by? Just about everybody does. I remember the lecture about the bystander effect in Psych 101. It brought up the Genovese case (which incidentally has been retold so often that it no longer looks like the original event - your version is more extreme than most). The professor also pointed out that we were now all thinking that we would resist the effect since we knew about it, but he explained how he - an expert on this effect - had been equally paralyzed when a guy got a heart attack at a bus stop. I think he cited some of the psych student studies too. Then he did something useful: he explained how to avoid the effect. If you are the victim, point at somebody and say "You in the green shirt. Help me/call 911/..." This breaks the symmetry and not only gets the appointed one to act, but tends to get the rest of the bystanders to help. (There are also other symmetry breakers, like being part of a caring profession - they also find that they "must" help). Note that this is all about applied psychology, which is really what you want to use to do applied ethics. Theoretical ethics is more interesting to philosophers, but real ethics is more of a branch of psychology and sociology. Which is actually the main point of Aristotle! (Yup, I am totally an Aristotle fanboy. Despite the guy being wrong about 90% of everything :-) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 20:54:59 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 15:54:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <013501d1fb1b$5c125890$143709b0$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> <013501d1fb1b$5c125890$143709b0$@att.net> Message-ID: Result: a sharp motivated student can get from basic addition to calculus in four years rather than the usual twelve, and once they do, they know everything in between much better and can use it far more effectively. spike I have no comment on math education as I know nothing about it outside of statistics. You have seen it work and that is good enough for me. Once we move outside of math, however, there are certain features to education in which students may not be able to move as fast as they can in math. I refer you to Bloom's taxonomy, link below: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html Look esp. at the cognitive realm and tell me that 12 year old students can go all the way through those steps. He cannot. His brain is simply not ready. I found that I did not understand some concepts until I was out of grad school - not fully. Of course I was 26 and perhaps, as I had evinced earlier, was a slow grower, not peaking until my 30s in some regards. But, like everything else, the proof is in the pudding, and it may be that the Google approach will work for areas outside of math. I'd like to see the research. As for brain readiness, I note with some humor that psych 101 was not to be taken by freshmen when I went to college and when I started teaching college some ten years later that was still the case, though it changed in the 70s. In sum, I think psychology cannot be taught effectively the way you describe: watch a DVD for 20 minutes, do some practice work, and so on. Now History - I never had a good teacher and think that maybe it can't be taught any way at all. I never made above a C in it except for Ancient History (easier teacher probably, as it was not a popular course). Ss should be given a History DVD and tested later. No need for a teacher! bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:45 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:49 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question > > > > Then please comment upon your comment above, in light of the modern > education philosophy: a teacher should be a guide on the side rather than a > sage on the stage. > > > > spike > > > > I would have quit and gone into marketing. Example: my chairman asked if > I would like the department to buy some statistics videos by some > well-known teacher. ? > > bill w > > > > > > > > Ah OK BillW. I understand now, and should have specified making > observations from the students? point of view rather than the teacher?s. > If you know any fifth and sixth grade teachers, feel free to invite their > views on this matter. > > > > There is a reason why I suggested viewing a KA video: the format of a ten > minute lecture immediately followed by exercises on that topic. I see this > as a far more efficient and effective means of teaching many if not most > topics than the classroom structure mandated by practicalities. We have > the students gather in a particular place and particular time at great > expense and effort in many cases, give them an hour lecture, then off they > go to do the homework. But concentration spans are generally shorter than > that and getting steadily shorter. So, the Khan Academy format offers ten > minute lectures interspersed with approximately twenty minutes of practice > and a series of mastery assessments. This really works. > > > > Another observation please, one I might share with Google, or Chris can > pass it along if he wishes. > > > > We remember our own education, but allow me to focus please on an area I > know better than the others: mathematics. > > > > Plenty of us here are engineers or software developers or some kind of > math geek. How many have ever been on a project where it was design by > committee, but the committee was made up of individuals, egos, rivalries, > they never went out and talked shop, or for whatever reason the members > didn?t like each other much or didn?t work together well as a team? Ja, > most of us have at one point or another. OK, how many were satisfied with > the final product? Ja, none of us were. No one on that team was > satisfied, and we could all imagine a better one. The product lacks > cohesiveness. The pieces don?t work all that well together and we can all > easily see wasted effort everywhere in that design. > > > > Traditional education using traditional methods is like that. A > mathematics curriculum is designed by a dozen or more different people, all > with their own ideas of what is important, each with their own focus, each > with a vague idea the student is shooting for college calculus perhaps, but > the end product is really filled with gaps, over-writes, redos, wasted > effort, wasted time, none of it really the fault of school or the > curriculum designers. > > > > Now consider the alternative: one person who has a clear vision gets to > design the entire curriculum from early grades up through college. She > knows the skills the student must master to get to the next point on the > continuum. The entire process is cohesive. > > > > Result: a sharp motivated student can get from basic addition to calculus > in four years rather than the usual twelve, and once they do, they know > everything in between much better and can use it far more effectively. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 22:29:38 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 15:29:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: >> > >> Perhaps so, but gene were around a *long* time before they gave rise >> to creatures who could think even a little. > > Until it succeeded in inventing brains after 3 billion years of effort > Evolution was the only way to make complex things. > > But times change. They do indeed. But we have not yet escaped biology and the influence of the genes, even here. I make the case that the reason people post on mailing lists like this one is rooted in their psychological trait of seeking status. At a time not so long ago in genetic terms, males had to gain a certain level of status before they became attractive to females and had a chance to become ancestors. The same psychological trait that induced hunters to drag back a large chunk of meat (and got extra nooky for their trouble) is largely decoupled from gaining status by posting or writing papers. I can't think of a case where someone got laid as a consequence of posting on a mailing list, but it might have happened. >> this century could be dramatically more bloody than the first half >> of the last century. > > There is certainly the potential for that, and that's why it's important > that the person in charge of H-bombs be knowledgeable about world events, > have a thick skin and even temperament, not be a sucker for conspiracy > theories, and make life or death decisions based on facts not gut instincts > or invisible men in the sky. It would also be helpful if that person was not > crazy. You are correct, but you miss the main point of this evolutionary psychology model of why people follow irrational leaders. There is a 2014 movie, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look_Who%27s_Back_%28film%29 where Hitler returns via a time warp or something. Somewhere over half way into the movie (which hit number one in Germany) Hitler has a flash of insight where he says if it wasn't me it would have happened anyway with someone else. >> but think about what happened to the >> Germans in the 20s. Just because a country is highly civilized >> doesn't mean they can't jump into being barbarians in a heartbeat. > > I hope you won't have another example of that in 5 months. Me too. But the problem does not reside in Trump, but the American people. And going back a step, to the economic distress they are in, and back a step more, to the conditions which have wiped out most of the good paying jobs they used to have. Globalization is a great concept unless you are the one being downsized. In the movie mentioned above, Hitler says that he was elected by the German people, and if he is a monster, then so is every German. The problem is much wider than Germans or Americans. It's humanity wide that the perception of a bleak future (relative to the past and present) flips a population wide behavioral switch that puts the population on the way to war. One of the side effects of flipping the switch is that people follow irrational leaders. It also screws up their judgment, making them effectively stupid. Nobody starts a war expecting to loose. A rational view is that (on average) you loose wars half the time. Of course, when I say it flips a population wide behavioral switch, it doesn't do so for everyone all at once. It's a big country for one thing and conditions vary as well as personal thresholds. We shall see how the vote turns out, but my guess at this point is that at least a third of the US population have gone into this mode. >> For about 90% of Americans, i.e., all but the top ten percent, their >> real income has not gone up since the late 70s or early 80s. They >> have not recovered what they lost in the 2008 recession. > > Yes. I'm a Libertarian but what you say above is true and Libertarians > ignore that fact at their peril. In 2016 the richest 62 people on the planet > had as much money as the poorest 3.5 billion people, as recently as 2014 it > took 13 more, back then it took 85 people to equal the poorest half of the > human population. I think it's fair to say that one way or another this > trend will NOT continue. If I was one of those 62 hyper rich people and had > a brain in my head I'd try to close that huge gap or at least slow its rate > of growth, and I'd do it even if I didn't give a damn about other people and > was only interested in myself because I'd know if I didn't it would only be > a matter of time before I'd lose my head. It would help if the very rich decided it was in their interest for the bulk of the population to see that they have a bright future, but directly redistributing their wealth will not fix the problem, they don't have enough to do it. If something can be done at all, it will take implementing different technology, particularly a technology that gets humanity off fossil fuels while lowering the cost of energy. It's a complicated problem. Keith > John K Clark > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 20 22:45:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 15:45:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> <013501d1fb1b$5c125890$143709b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <022201d1fb34$8567f970$9037ec50$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 1:55 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question Result: a sharp motivated student can get from basic addition to calculus in four years rather than the usual twelve, and once they do, they know everything in between much better and can use it far more effectively. spike >?Now History - I never had a good teacher and think that maybe it can't be taught any way at all. I never made above a C in it except for Ancient History (easier teacher probably, as it was not a popular course). Ss should be given a History DVD and tested later. No need for a teacher! bill w BillW, let us use that comment as a jumping off point and look specifically at history please. This is a perfect example of the shortcomings of traditional teaching imposed on us by the inherent limitations of classroom constraints. As in mathematics, some students will get it immediately, others eventually, some never, but it is easy enough to verify that in our own country, the collective understanding of history is anywhere from appalling to something worse than that. It isn?t just a song: we don?t know much about history, even those of us who do know what a slide rule is for. Since you and I are Americans, do this experiment: ask a few fellow yanks if they know the location of Helsinki. The blanks stares you will get from most is better than those who attempt it: Yup, ah know where?s Helsinki. Bad people go there when they die. The really bad ones keep right on sinkin? down and end up in Hail-sinki. I exaggerate. But not by much. I would be surprised if 20% of yanks can name the country. We yanks are not given a good overall view of history or geo-politics. Our formal education on this general area is sketchy, piecemeal, designed by committee. Do let me return to math for the following thought experiment. Imagine teaching a child from start of first grade up through the top level a high school student generally attains, which would be the equivalent of about through the first semester of calculus. Imagine all the mathematics included in those 12 years of instruction, and imagine parsing it into skills. I leave you to define those skills any way you want, but Khan did so with about 8 to 10 minute lectures, followed by four levels of practice, typically about five exercises in each level, then a final assessment to achieve mastery in that skill. So in general, a skill would take a typical student about half an hour average. The areas will include arithmetic, the algebra, the geometry, trigonometry, numerical analysis, probability and statistics, modeling, analytic geometry, pre-calculus, all the way up thru and including differential (but not integral) calculus. Given those criteria, how many discrete skills would you estimate are required to go from start to end of first semester calculus? Or another way to ask: if you were designing a complete start to end of differential calculus training regime, how many skills would you estimate you will need to create for an average student? You may work backwards if you wish: estimate the number of hours of study, and time per skill. Don?t look up Sal Khan?s skill breakdown before you estimate it on your own. Ready, set, GO! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Aug 20 23:50:45 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 18:50:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <022201d1fb34$8567f970$9037ec50$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <00c601d1fb0b$51373680$f3a5a380$@att.net> <013501d1fb1b$5c125890$143709b0$@att.net> <022201d1fb34$8567f970$9037ec50$@att.net> Message-ID: Given those criteria, how many discrete skills would you estimate are required to go from start to end of first semester calculus? Or another way to ask: if you were designing a complete start to end of differential calculus training regime, how many skills would you estimate you will need to create for an average student? spike Huh?? Didn't I ever tell you that I stopped with college algebra? I could not do that exercise even for algebra, or, come to think of it, any skill whatsoever from ping pong to operating a skilsaw I've checked my knowledge for a long time by remembering the makeup of the Supreme Court. You are right, history, geography skills are appalling as we are so often reminded by news articles. bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 5:45 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, August 20, 2016 1:55 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question > > > > Result: a sharp motivated student can get from basic addition to > calculus in four years rather than the usual twelve, and once they do, they > know everything in between much better and can use it far more effectively. > > > > spike > > > > >?Now History - I never had a good teacher and think that maybe it can't > be taught any way at all. I never made above a C in it except for Ancient > History (easier teacher probably, as it was not a popular course). Ss > should be given a History DVD and tested later. No need for a teacher! > > > > bill w > > > > > > BillW, let us use that comment as a jumping off point and look > specifically at history please. > > > > This is a perfect example of the shortcomings of traditional teaching > imposed on us by the inherent limitations of classroom constraints. As in > mathematics, some students will get it immediately, others eventually, some > never, but it is easy enough to verify that in our own country, the > collective understanding of history is anywhere from appalling to something > worse than that. It isn?t just a song: we don?t know much about history, > even those of us who do know what a slide rule is for. > > > > Since you and I are Americans, do this experiment: ask a few fellow yanks > if they know the location of Helsinki. The blanks stares you will get from > most is better than those who attempt it: Yup, ah know where?s Helsinki. > Bad people go there when they die. The really bad ones keep right on > sinkin? down and end up in Hail-sinki. > > > > I exaggerate. But not by much. I would be surprised if 20% of yanks can > name the country. We yanks are not given a good overall view of history or > geo-politics. Our formal education on this general area is sketchy, > piecemeal, designed by committee. > > > > Do let me return to math for the following thought experiment. > > > > Imagine teaching a child from start of first grade up through the top > level a high school student generally attains, which would be the > equivalent of about through the first semester of calculus. Imagine all > the mathematics included in those 12 years of instruction, and imagine > parsing it into skills. I leave you to define those skills any way you > want, but Khan did so with about 8 to 10 minute lectures, followed by four > levels of practice, typically about five exercises in each level, then a > final assessment to achieve mastery in that skill. So in general, a skill > would take a typical student about half an hour average. > > > > The areas will include arithmetic, the algebra, the geometry, > trigonometry, numerical analysis, probability and statistics, modeling, > analytic geometry, pre-calculus, all the way up thru and including > differential (but not integral) calculus. > > > > Given those criteria, how many discrete skills would you estimate are > required to go from start to end of first semester calculus? Or another > way to ask: if you were designing a complete start to end of differential > calculus training regime, how many skills would you estimate you will need > to create for an average student? > > > > You may work backwards if you wish: estimate the number of hours of study, > and time per skill. > > > > Don?t look up Sal Khan?s skill breakdown before you estimate it on your > own. > > > > Ready, set, GO! > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 00:52:52 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 20:52:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 Keith Henson wrote: ?> ? > Somewhere over > ? > half way into the movie (which hit number one in Germany) Hitler has a > ? > flash of insight where he says if it wasn't me it would have happened > ? > anyway with someone else. > I'm afraid ?I'll have to disagree with Hitler about that. I think if Hitler had never been born WW2 would not have happened, or at least the European part wouldn't have.The general population was enthusiastic when German troops marched into the Rhineland in 1936 and they approved the annexation of Austria in 1938 so those things probably would probably happened even without Hitler. But the German people were far less enthusiastic about occupying Czechoslovakia in 1939 and even less so about marching into Poland 6 months later. Hitler really had to push for those last two and that's what started the War and I don't think that would have happened without him. ?> ? > The problem is much wider than Germans or Americans. It's humanity > wide that the perception of a bleak future (relative to the past and > present) flips a population wide behavioral switch that puts the > population on the way to war. ?But In Germany in the late 1930s the country was in a clear economic upswing, hyperinflation was long over, people had jobs and they were doing pretty well and there was every reason to believe their children would do even better, but ?that's when Germany started a World War because Germany was being lead by a madman. Economics certainly plays a important part in history, but so do individuals. > ?> ? > A rational view is that (on average) you loose > ? > wars half the time. > ?If it's a nuclear was you loose 100% ? ?of the time. And the Allies won WW2 but other than stopping a madman it's not clear exactly what they won. ? > In 2016 the richest 62 people on the planet >> ? >> had as much money as the poorest 3.5 billion people, as recently as 2014 >> it >> ? t >> ook 13 more, back then it took 85 people to equal the poorest half of the >> ? >> human population. I think it's fair to say that one way or another this >> ? >> trend will NOT continue. If I was one of those 62 hyper rich people and >> had >> ? >> a brain in my head I'd try to close that huge gap or at least slow its >> rate >> ? >> of growth, and I'd do it even if I didn't give a damn about other people >> and >> ? >> was only interested in myself because I'd know if I didn't it would only >> be >> ? >> a matter of time before I'd lose my head. > > > ?> ? > It would help if the very rich decided it was in their interest for > the bulk of the population to see that they have a bright future, but > directly redistributing their wealth will not fix the problem, they > don't have enough to do it. ?There is not less wealth in the world today than there was 30 years ago there is considerably more, but it is being distributed into far fewer hands. ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 02:24:10 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:24:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 5:52 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 Keith Henson wrote: > >> > >> Somewhere over >> half way into the movie (which hit number one in Germany) Hitler has a >> flash of insight where he says if it wasn't me it would have happened >> anyway with someone else. > > I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with Hitler about that. It's the Hitler character. I don't think Hitler himself had that much insight. > I think if Hitler > had never been born WW2 would not have happened, or at least the European > part wouldn't have.The general population was enthusiastic when German > troops marched into the Rhineland in 1936 and they approved the annexation > of Austria in 1938 so those things probably would probably happened even > without Hitler. You know more about this segment of history than I do. > But the German people were far less enthusiastic about > occupying Czechoslovakia in 1939 and even less so about marching into Poland > 6 months later. Hitler really had to push for those last two and that's what > started the War and I don't think that would have happened without him. I suspect that eating up countries is like eating potato chips, it's hard to stop. >> The problem is much wider than Germans or Americans. It's humanity >> wide that the perception of a bleak future (relative to the past and >> present) flips a population wide behavioral switch that puts the >> population on the way to war. > > But In Germany in the late 1930s the country was in a clear economic > upswing, hyperinflation was long over, people had jobs and they were doing > pretty well and there was every reason to believe their children would do > even better, but that's when Germany started a World War because Germany was > being lead by a madman. Economics certainly plays a important part in > history, but so do individuals. A madman who became Der Fuhrer due largely to the bad economics of the time when the Germans elected him. History has a long tail. >> A rational view is that (on average) you loose >> wars half the time. > > If it's a nuclear was you loose 100% > of the time. And the Allies won WW2 but other than stopping a madman it's > not clear exactly what they won. Unfortunately rational thinking is one of the casualties of the mode turned on by perception of a bleak future. >>> > In 2016 the richest 62 people on the planet snip >> It would help if the very rich decided it was in their interest for >> the bulk of the population to see that they have a bright future, but >> directly redistributing their wealth will not fix the problem, they >> don't have enough to do it. > > There is not less wealth in the world today than there was 30 years ago > there is considerably more, On a per capita basis, I wonder. Most of the increase in world per capita income in the last 30 years has happened in China. EP/memes/War theory says that as long as they see a bright future, i.e., one better than the current or at least not worse, war mode thinking will not arise in China. A good part of the problem in the US is that the average worker got used to a high and increasing standard of living. Toward the end, the standard of living was held up by the housing bubble. High energy prices seems to be a major contributor to the collapse. > but it is being distributed into far fewer hands. >From an EP viewpoint, I am not sure how much of a problem that is. We need to sort out how the super rich use their resources. If they are using them as founding capital for new industry, that's one thing. If they just sit on vast amounts of non circulating money that's another. I suspect that's what happened since the injection of vast amounts of money post 2008 does not seem to have caused inflation. The worry is about deflation. Economies are emergent. I don't think anyone actually understands them. However, Gail Tverberg is one of the few who couples energy and debt into the model. Keith From anders at aleph.se Sat Aug 20 19:52:35 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 20:52:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <88bc3108-3ca1-0cd1-5d21-9ea4ec9432ed@aleph.se> On 2016-08-20 15:00, spike wrote: > ...School is often a hindrance for education... > --Dr Anders Sandberg > > > Public schools are not allowed to offer ethical or moral guidance in our > times. That is actually not true. Try to find any school that says it is OK to cheat. They might not dress it up in the finery of ethics, but there is a lot of guidance in how to behave. > The best part of this curriculum is that it appears to be completely > open-ended. None of it depends on a teacher or a class of similarly-aged > compatriots; the student progresses as fast and as far as ambition, talent > and drive will take her. Now that is promising! The important issue is how well such classrooms can teach how to link the material. I think a possible problem is that the individual course materials might be great highways of knowledge, but that there is little connection between them - after all, if I have charged down a few of them (say language and math), I might not have great exposure to the field in between (formal languages, some philosophy, logic) since the courses in themselves cannot contain much about related fields given that the student might not have taken the courses that would help bound them. In the best of all possible educational world there would be tools for mapping out studies, showing that there is something out there and what you need to get to it. Another interesting educational method is of course to start in the middle and see how that requires understanding the other topics. I found a book on folkloric superstitions in school, and learned a surprising amount of geography, history and biology by following up on it. > It will be fun to watch what this cohort will achieve. Yup. Cognitive enhancement doesn't have to be biomedical. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 21 05:41:53 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:41:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <88bc3108-3ca1-0cd1-5d21-9ea4ec9432ed@aleph.se> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <88bc3108-3ca1-0cd1-5d21-9ea4ec9432ed@aleph.se> Message-ID: <006c01d1fb6e$b9b22810$2d167830$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Anders Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question On 2016-08-20 15:00, spike wrote: > ...School is often a hindrance for education... > --Dr Anders Sandberg > >>... The best part of this curriculum is that it appears to be completely open-ended... >...Now that is promising! Ja! Read on please. >>... It will be fun to watch what this cohort will achieve. >...Yup. Cognitive enhancement doesn't have to be biomedical.-- Dr Anders Sandberg Thanks for that, sir! Anders and BillW, there is a reason why I suggested that thought experiment where I proposed estimating the number of hours a typical or high end student would invest in studying math by the traditional means. Here are my estimates: A student typically is in math instruction about half an hour to perhaps 3/4 of an hour a day on the average in traditional school. We have 180 school days a year, so close enough to 100 to 130 hours of instruction per year, but if a student reaches for the high end of the achievement spectrum, to finish a year of calculus by high school, requires doubling up with two math classes, and it requires significant amounts time invested in homework. (Did anyone here finish calculus without doing a pile of homework? Didn't think so.) By that line of reasoning, the time investment would likely go well above the estimated 1200 to 1500 hours for that level of mastery. Once I take the doubling up and the homework into account I would be hard pressed to get any estimate less than about 2000 hours of study devoted to math-related disciplines to complete a year of calculus. Does 2000 hours seem like a reasonable estimate for about an 90th percentile student reaching for completing a year of the queen of mathematics? I will buy it, and would be more comfortable guessing higher than 2k rather than estimating lower. Anders? A discrete skill as defined by Sal Khan is one which can be explained in ten minutes or less and mastered in less than an hour of practice and assessment. Four examples of a skill might be Cramer's rule, evaluating determinants, partial fraction decomposition, equation of a line given a point and a slope. In Khan Academy, to get from start to end of differential calculus requires mastery of a number of skills. That number is... 1040. I measured the time required to master discrete skills with my own student and came away with an answer of about 40 minutes. So... this is a case where a first grader started the program and mastered the 1040 skills in about 700 hours. So here is the insight on why I am grinding away on this and really driving hard with this question. Compare a curriculum is designed by one person from start to finish to a curriculum designed by a committee of individual egos who do not talk to each other, a committee with no cohesive overall vision or structure, a committee whose goal is to sell copies of their own books. The single-designer curriculum will be more efficient than the design-by-fractured-committee curriculum by about a factor of 3. This could enable a student to master a level of proficiency in about four years rather than the more traditional twelve years. I can show you an example of student who has done in four what most students do in twelve. Anders, your thoughts please? BillW, your thoughts please? In the next episode... the impact of high efficiency instruction allowing students to master the higher levels of study earlier in life. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 14:28:34 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 09:28:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question In-Reply-To: <006c01d1fb6e$b9b22810$2d167830$@att.net> References: <003001d1faeb$3dac5de0$b90519a0$@att.net> <88bc3108-3ca1-0cd1-5d21-9ea4ec9432ed@aleph.se> <006c01d1fb6e$b9b22810$2d167830$@att.net> Message-ID: I found a book on folkloric superstitions in school, and learned a surprising amount of geography, history and biology by following up on it The important issue is how well such classrooms can teach how to link the material anders Please share the name of that book. This continuum of sorts served my purposes well: physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, anthropology. I started with this, noted the overlaps, biochemistry, social psych, etc., and referred to them throughout the semester, though mostly as added material to the text, and usually as untested material. I did a fair amount of untested presentations. What that did was to make them put down their pencils and listen to me take them further than the text. I regarded these additives as times for me to really create and make the material interesting. So maybe a fourth of the content or more of my classes was untested by design and constituted what was, to me, the most important part of the class. This was a 101 setting. For upper level they had to link material on tests, essays, and other papers with examples not in the book or my presentations. What a lot of my students told me later in life was that my wanderings were the most memorable parts of my classes. I told a lot of stories - some invented. To my mind there is nothing like a good story to make points and to be easy to remember. Now maybe it can backfire on you: one student in his 30s told me that the only thing he remembered about my class was that if you ate 14 hamburgers the last would not taste as good as the first. That's another point; the weirder you get the better the memory. I have no idea how any of this relates to teaching hard science and math, but I"ll bet you do. bill w On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 12:41 AM, spike wrote: > > >... On Behalf Of Anders > Subject: Re: [ExI] google classroom, was: RE: Meta question > > On 2016-08-20 15:00, spike wrote: > > ...School is often a hindrance for education... > > --Dr Anders Sandberg > > > > >>... The best part of this curriculum is that it appears to be completely > open-ended... > > >...Now that is promising! > > Ja! Read on please. > > >>... It will be fun to watch what this cohort will achieve. > > >...Yup. Cognitive enhancement doesn't have to be biomedical.-- Dr Anders > Sandberg > > Thanks for that, sir! > > Anders and BillW, there is a reason why I suggested that thought experiment > where I proposed estimating the number of hours a typical or high end > student would invest in studying math by the traditional means. Here are > my > estimates: > > A student typically is in math instruction about half an hour to perhaps > 3/4 > of an hour a day on the average in traditional school. We have 180 school > days a year, so close enough to 100 to 130 hours of instruction per year, > but if a student reaches for the high end of the achievement spectrum, to > finish a year of calculus by high school, requires doubling up with two > math > classes, and it requires significant amounts time invested in homework. > (Did anyone here finish calculus without doing a pile of homework? Didn't > think so.) > > By that line of reasoning, the time investment would likely go well above > the estimated 1200 to 1500 hours for that level of mastery. Once I take > the > doubling up and the homework into account I would be hard pressed to get > any > estimate less than about 2000 hours of study devoted to math-related > disciplines to complete a year of calculus. > > Does 2000 hours seem like a reasonable estimate for about an 90th > percentile > student reaching for completing a year of the queen of mathematics? I will > buy it, and would be more comfortable guessing higher than 2k rather than > estimating lower. Anders? > > A discrete skill as defined by Sal Khan is one which can be explained in > ten > minutes or less and mastered in less than an hour of practice and > assessment. Four examples of a skill might be Cramer's rule, evaluating > determinants, partial fraction decomposition, equation of a line given a > point and a slope. In Khan Academy, to get from start to end of > differential calculus requires mastery of a number of skills. That number > is... 1040. > > I measured the time required to master discrete skills with my own student > and came away with an answer of about 40 minutes. So... this is a case > where a first grader started the program and mastered the 1040 skills in > about 700 hours. > > So here is the insight on why I am grinding away on this and really driving > hard with this question. Compare a curriculum is designed by one person > from start to finish to a curriculum designed by a committee of individual > egos who do not talk to each other, a committee with no cohesive overall > vision or structure, a committee whose goal is to sell copies of their own > books. The single-designer curriculum will be more efficient than the > design-by-fractured-committee curriculum by about a factor of 3. This > could > enable a student to master a level of proficiency in about four years > rather > than the more traditional twelve years. > > I can show you an example of student who has done in four what most > students > do in twelve. > > Anders, your thoughts please? BillW, your thoughts please? > > In the next episode... the impact of high efficiency instruction allowing > students to master the higher levels of study earlier in life. > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 14:57:54 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 09:57:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence Message-ID: In today's NYTimes: "The world's most famous statue may someday topple, done in by hairline cracks in its ankles and tremors from a quake, traffic or millions of tourists' feet." Can you hard science guys get moving faster on antigravity, please? bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 21 15:37:59 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 08:37:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 7:58 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In today's NYTimes: "The world's most famous statue may someday topple, done in by hairline cracks in its ankles and tremors from a quake, traffic or millions of tourists' feet." Can you hard science guys get moving faster on antigravity, please? Bill No need for mysterious physics BillW; I have an idea, rather two of them, neither requiring anti-gravity. Allow me to offer a mechanical engineer?s perspective please rather than a physics-based solution. We know that stone is very strong in compressive load; that stuff is great for making mountains. This explains why nearly all mountains are made of it. Stone is good in shear stress, which is why rock fractures look the way they do (review your mechanical engineering books, that chapter on Mohr?s Circle and measuring ratios of shear to compressive stress using Cauchy stress tensor.) Marble (and stone in general) is not good at resisting bending moment, which is why stone arches are arches instead of one block going across horizontally: arches are in compression, straight across stone would be in bending stress. But rock is in general terrible at tensile stress, really lousy at that. This is why it is never used for tension elements. The old Greeks were smart guys, but all they had for building material was stone. So? the old timers didn?t build any structures anywhere which require tension elements. OK so the real problem here is that David?s ankles are in slight bending moment loading, and might fail. First idea: calculate the center of gravity of the sculpture, then slightly tilt the base so that both ankles are in compression loading only. Or get it as close as we can. It is over-constrained, so we can?t get both ankles in perfect compression-only loading, but it can be improved by slightly tilting the base. The necessary tilt would scarcely be noticed, and tourists would never know Michel didn?t plan it that way to start with, perhaps at Mrs. Angelo?s suggestion. Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. Faced with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would piss. So, we add on a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted yellow to reinforce the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 15:52:34 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 08:52:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 21, 2016, at 8:37 AM, spike wrote: > But rock is in general terrible at tensile stress, really lousy at that. This is why it is never used for tension elements. The old Greeks were smart guys, but all they had for building material was stone. So? the old timers didn?t build any structures anywhere which require tension elements. The ancient Greeks also had wood and mud brick for building materials. It's not like former building materials disappeared during that time. ;) > OK so the real problem here is that David?s ankles are in slight bending moment loading, and might fail. > > First idea: calculate the center of gravity of the sculpture, then slightly tilt the base so that both ankles are in compression loading only. Or get it as close as we can. It is over-constrained, so we can?t get both ankles in perfect compression-only loading, but it can be improved by slightly tilting the base. The necessary tilt would scarcely be noticed, and tourists would never know Michel didn?t plan it that way to start with, perhaps at Mrs. Angelo?s suggestion. If the geometry of that statue can do that, it's an excellent idea. And why couldn't viewers simply be told that it's been done? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 17:19:33 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 13:19:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:37 AM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > In today's NYTimes: > > "The world's most famous statue may someday topple, done in by hairline > cracks in its ankles and tremors from a quake, traffic or millions of > tourists' feet." > ?It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a ultraviolet LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because ?then you could use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want. ?> ? > Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. > Faced with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would piss. So, we > add on a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted yellow to > reinforce the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. > > Absolutely Brilliant, ?I love it!? ?Your idea is even better than mine! By the way, why do they call it "Michelangelo's" David? ?David existed in a big block of marble for hundreds of millions of years before Michelangelo ? was born, all Michelangelo ? did was unpack it. When I bought my iMac it came in a big box, and I unpacked it. Well OK ? Michelangelo ?'s? ? unpacking job may have been a little trickier than ?mine, but still.... John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 21 17:45:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 10:45:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? ?>?It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a ultraviolet LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because ?then you could use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want? Cool, you make the Davids, I will make the Christmas Tree accessory. ?> ?>?Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. Faced with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would piss. So, we add on a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted yellow to reinforce the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. >?Absolutely Brilliant, ?I love it!? ?>?Your idea is even better than mine! You are too kind sir. But your idea gave me a third idea, which is at least cheaper than the other ideas. Since you brought up LIDAR, I thought of using an eddy current sensor to go around the ankles and determine where is the most compressive stress and where is the least. We use your LIDAR model to determine the CG of the statue. With the readings on the EC sensor and knowing the CG, we can determine the approximate location on the floor where the artwork would smite the planet. Then we create those outlines like the constables paint around the outline of corpses in American cities (the ones which are actively engaged in constant low-level civil war (such as Detroit, DC and New Orleans)) on the floor of the museum, except this outline is really really big and not as clearly defined. Make it with fuzzy borders perhaps, or calculate an outline of equal probability. Put a sign on an easel inside the outline: if you are reading this when David takes a dive, you are dead. That kind of thing. That wouldn?t cost much: hell I bet I could calculate a rough outline on the floor. A roll of duct tape could create the border, and I know we have some spare eddy current detectors lying around in a lab where I used to work when I was a young man. They would probably loan them to an engineering-minded prole to take over wherever David stands (Helskinki?) We could even make money on the deal: charge a higher price for tickets on David?s safer side, his non-landing site of the statue. We could even do the same trick with all those Christmas-tree-base Davids. Ohhh, big money to be made here, big. >?By the way, why do they call it "Michelangelo's" David? ?David existed in a big block of marble for hundreds of millions of years before Michelangelo was born, all Michelangelo did was unpack it? John K Clark Ja! All this time he gets credit for it, buddies coming by, Hey Mike! Whaddya doing dude? He would say something like: chipping away everything that isn?t David. Well how the hell does he figure? Every chip contained smaller replicas of the big guy, ja? So how does he figure they weren?t also rock encrusted Davids? And each chip of each smaller David would itself contain still smaller Davids and way more of them, all the way down to the calcium carbonate. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 19:36:11 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 14:36:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rational irrationality versus doublethinkEdit Rational irrationality is not doublethink and does not state that the individual deliberately chooses to believe something he or she knows to be false. Rather, the theory is that when the costs of having erroneous beliefs are low, people relax their intellectual standards and allow themselves to be more easily influenced by fallacious reasoning , cognitive biases , and emotional appeals . In other words, people do not deliberately seek to believe false things but stop putting in the intellectual effort to be open to evidence that may contradict their beliefs. >From the Wikipedia link provided by Dan Now you know me, I don't mind making a fool of myself (as you may have noticed). I have no philosophy degree and cannot even be said to be well read in the classics much less modern philosophy. And yet the above paragraph makes little sense to me. In fact, I think it's stupid - stupid in my definition being knowing better but not doing better. This rational irrationality seems to fit this perfectly. But it's at low cost, you say. Huh? What costs? How about self-esteem, self-respect? Pretty important to the moral person wouldn't you say? To ditch your rationality in favor of emotional appeals, cognitive biases, and fallacious reasoning is just treason or blatant hypocrisy in the context of a highly rational and moral person. In my terms, it's cognitive dissonance big time. To say that it's not consciously done seems beside the point: a highly rational and moral person keeps the contents of his mind under guard at all times - self-monitoring some call it. I would not refuse to believe that a person could do these things, but I would have little respect for such a person. I respect philosophy, but it seems to be somewhat insular - staying to themselves, publishing only in their own journals - much like psychology does, in fact. I think there should be much more interplay and conversation, such as I am trying to provide here. I'll read the rest of Caplan, but will leave my comments if any for later. bill w On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 5:52 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 Keith Henson wrote: > > > >> > > >> Somewhere over > >> half way into the movie (which hit number one in Germany) Hitler has a > >> flash of insight where he says if it wasn't me it would have happened > >> anyway with someone else. > > > > I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with Hitler about that. > > It's the Hitler character. I don't think Hitler himself had that much > insight. > > > I think if Hitler > > had never been born WW2 would not have happened, or at least the European > > part wouldn't have.The general population was enthusiastic when German > > troops marched into the Rhineland in 1936 and they approved the > annexation > > of Austria in 1938 so those things probably would probably happened even > > without Hitler. > > You know more about this segment of history than I do. > > > But the German people were far less enthusiastic about > > occupying Czechoslovakia in 1939 and even less so about marching into > Poland > > 6 months later. Hitler really had to push for those last two and that's > what > > started the War and I don't think that would have happened without him. > > I suspect that eating up countries is like eating potato chips, it's > hard to stop. > > >> The problem is much wider than Germans or Americans. It's humanity > >> wide that the perception of a bleak future (relative to the past and > >> present) flips a population wide behavioral switch that puts the > >> population on the way to war. > > > > But In Germany in the late 1930s the country was in a clear economic > > upswing, hyperinflation was long over, people had jobs and they were > doing > > pretty well and there was every reason to believe their children would do > > even better, but that's when Germany started a World War because Germany > was > > being lead by a madman. Economics certainly plays a important part in > > history, but so do individuals. > > A madman who became Der Fuhrer due largely to the bad economics of the > time when the Germans elected him. History has a long tail. > > >> A rational view is that (on average) you loose > >> wars half the time. > > > > If it's a nuclear was you loose 100% > > of the time. And the Allies won WW2 but other than stopping a madman it's > > not clear exactly what they won. > > Unfortunately rational thinking is one of the casualties of the mode > turned on by perception of a bleak future. > > >>> > In 2016 the richest 62 people on the planet > > snip > > >> It would help if the very rich decided it was in their interest for > >> the bulk of the population to see that they have a bright future, but > >> directly redistributing their wealth will not fix the problem, they > >> don't have enough to do it. > > > > There is not less wealth in the world today than there was 30 years ago > > there is considerably more, > > On a per capita basis, I wonder. Most of the increase in world per > capita income in the last 30 years has happened in China. > EP/memes/War theory says that as long as they see a bright future, > i.e., one better than the current or at least not worse, war mode > thinking will not arise in China. A good part of the problem in the > US is that the average worker got used to a high and increasing > standard of living. Toward the end, the standard of living was held > up by the housing bubble. High energy prices seems to be a major > contributor to the collapse. > > > but it is being distributed into far fewer hands. > > From an EP viewpoint, I am not sure how much of a problem that is. We > need to sort out how the super rich use their resources. If they are > using them as founding capital for new industry, that's one thing. If > they just sit on vast amounts of non circulating money that's another. > I suspect that's what happened since the injection of vast amounts of > money post 2008 does not seem to have caused inflation. The worry is > about deflation. > > Economies are emergent. I don't think anyone actually understands > them. However, Gail Tverberg is one of the few who couples energy and > debt into the model. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 19:56:09 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 14:56:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> Message-ID: ?> ? Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. Faced with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would piss. So, we add on a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted yellow to reinforce the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. spike Daddy? Why is piss yellow and cum white? Daddy - so Auburn players can tell if they're coming or going. On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 12:45 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *John Clark > *?* > > > > ?>?It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a ultraviolet > LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because ?then you could > use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want? > > > > Cool, you make the Davids, I will make the Christmas Tree accessory. > > > > > > > > ?> ?>?Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that > sculpture. Faced with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would > piss. So, we add on a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted > yellow to reinforce the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. > > > > >?Absolutely Brilliant, ?I love it!? > > > > ?>?Your idea is even better than mine! > > > > You are too kind sir. But your idea gave me a third idea, which is at > least cheaper than the other ideas. Since you brought up LIDAR, I thought > of using an eddy current sensor to go around the ankles and determine where > is the most compressive stress and where is the least. We use your LIDAR > model to determine the CG of the statue. With the readings on the EC > sensor and knowing the CG, we can determine the approximate location on the > floor where the artwork would smite the planet. Then we create those > outlines like the constables paint around the outline of corpses in > American cities (the ones which are actively engaged in constant low-level > civil war (such as Detroit, DC and New Orleans)) on the floor of the > museum, except this outline is really really big and not as clearly > defined. Make it with fuzzy borders perhaps, or calculate an outline of > equal probability. Put a sign on an easel inside the outline: if you are > reading this when David takes a dive, you are dead. > > > > That kind of thing. > > > > That wouldn?t cost much: hell I bet I could calculate a rough outline on > the floor. A roll of duct tape could create the border, and I know we have > some spare eddy current detectors lying around in a lab where I used to > work when I was a young man. They would probably loan them to an > engineering-minded prole to take over wherever David stands (Helskinki?) > We could even make money on the deal: charge a higher price for tickets on > David?s safer side, his non-landing site of the statue. We could even do > the same trick with all those Christmas-tree-base Davids. Ohhh, big money > to be made here, big. > > > > > > > > >?By the way, why do they call it "Michelangelo's" David? ?David existed > in a big block of marble for hundreds of millions of years before > Michelangelo was born, all Michelangelo did was unpack it? John K Clark > > > > > > Ja! All this time he gets credit for it, buddies coming by, Hey Mike! > Whaddya doing dude? He would say something like: chipping away everything > that isn?t David. > > > > Well how the hell does he figure? Every chip contained smaller replicas > of the big guy, ja? So how does he figure they weren?t also rock encrusted > Davids? And each chip of each smaller David would itself contain still > smaller Davids and way more of them, all the way down to the calcium > carbonate. > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 20:48:28 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 13:48:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1510A447-AD81-40C6-9141-5C03E949E00B@gmail.com> On Aug 21, 2016, at 12:36 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Rational irrationality versus doublethink Edit > Rational irrationality is not doublethink and does not state that the individual deliberately chooses to believe something he or she knows to be false. Rather, the theory is that when the costs of having erroneous beliefs are low, people relax their intellectual standards and allow themselves to be more easily influenced by fallacious reasoning, cognitive biases, and emotional appeals. In other words, people do not deliberately seek to believe false things but stop putting in the intellectual effort to be open to evidence that may contradict their beliefs. > > From the Wikipedia link provided by Dan > > Now you know me, I don't mind making a fool of myself (as you may have noticed). I have no philosophy degree and cannot even be said to be well read in the classics much less modern philosophy. > > And yet the above paragraph makes little sense to me. In fact, I think it's stupid - stupid in my definition being knowing better but not doing better. This rational irrationality seems to fit this perfectly. > > But it's at low cost, you say. Huh? What costs? How about self-esteem, self-respect? Pretty important to the moral person wouldn't you say? To ditch your rationality in favor of emotional appeals, cognitive biases, and fallacious reasoning is just treason or blatant hypocrisy in the context of a highly rational and moral person. In my terms, it's cognitive dissonance big time. To say that it's not consciously done seems beside the point: a highly rational and moral person keeps the contents of his mind under guard at all times - self-monitoring some call it. > > I would not refuse to believe that a person could do these things, but I would have little respect for such a person. > > I respect philosophy, but it seems to be somewhat insular - staying to themselves, publishing only in their own journals - much like psychology does, in fact. I think there should be much more interplay and conversation, such as I am trying to provide here. > > I'll read the rest of Caplan, but will leave my comments if any for later. > Just to clear something up here before others jump on the bashing philosophers bandwagon, Caplan is an economist and his rational irrationality concept, though not unphilosophical smells much like an economics explanation. Also, he introduced the idea to a wider audience in his very popular book on voters. Though he did write two (IIRC) academic papers on it, this wasn't some idea only talked about amongst academics. And he has been critiqued on this by others. You're coming very late to the game. His book was published in 02007 and has discussed amongst economists, philosophers, political scientists, and libertarians. I'm not saying you've nothing to add here, but it's not the fact that Caplan's idea was, until you cast your eye toward the Wikipedia entry, the purview of some intellectual monks who never venture outside the halls of academe. ;) I think there's a widespread belief that you're under the spell of here too. This is that somehow folks who come up with and write about these kinds of ideas don't ever want or seek a wider audience. It's usually the opposite: they crave a wider audience. In Caplan's case, he was quite fortunate: his 02007 book has sold well. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 21 21:11:53 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 14:11:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> Message-ID: <019a01d1fbf0$a4b9fc30$ee2df490$@att.net> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 12:45 PM, spike > wrote: >? buddies coming by, Hey Mike! Whaddya doing dude? He would say something like: chipping away everything that isn?t David. ? Every chip contained smaller replicas of the big guy, ja? So how does he figure they weren?t also rock encrusted Davids? And each chip of each smaller David would itself contain still smaller Davids and way more of them, all the way down to the calcium carbonate?spike The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. Sure this went off on a rather lighthearted? eh? make that absurd note. But what if? David did topple one day and spoil the day of perhaps dozens of admiring proles? Since this is an engineering-oriented discussion, let us go that route and do some BOTECs, shall we? I have heard that David is about a triple scale if you assume the model was a big guy, and a big guy is about 100 kg and the volume of a solid scales as the cube of the linear dimension and so 3, 9, 27 times the volume of the 100kg guy and marble has a density of about 2.7 compared to humans? paltry 1 g/cc, so David would have a mass of about 7000 kg? Are you getting about that number? 7 tons of David? OK then, we can do the same trick to estimate the cross sectional area of the ankles, so a big guy might be about 10 cm by about 8 in roughly an ellipse (no not that part, I meant the ankle), so about 60 cm^2, triple and squared, we get around 500 cm^2 area per ankle times two ankles so about 1000 cm^2 supporting about 7 tons of David or about 70 kN on about a tenth of a square meter, so about 700 kPa, ja? Ha! Really a mere 700 kPa? To stone that kind of pressure is child?s play! Rather for stone that would be pebble?s play! Or would it? If you sat thru engineering school and didn?t learn about stress concentration in ceramic materials, you weren?t listening, in a really dangerous way. Two things I thought of: marble isn?t really very good as a structural material. It is great for sculptures because of its beauty and? it is easy to carve. Whyzat? Because it is relatively soft. Being stone, stress concentration is a big deal. With a five meter lever arm between ankles and neck, and an area moment of intertia small enough to obviate my even bothering to post BOTECs, you can see it would be easy to create sufficient stress concentrations to result in catastrophic structural failure at his ankles. Once we have those numbers we can estimate how easy it would be for three or four fidels to throw a rope over his neck and intentionally topple the artwork. Perhaps they would see internet images of infidels walking around, admiring it, women with heads uncovered, committing idolatry! This is offensive of course, people walking in circles around a stone, and it must be stopped. Keith?s evolutionary psychology-based theory on human behavior predicts that fidels might be motivated to destroy an idol if it gave them status in the eyes of their compatriots. The compatriot to adversary ratio increases steadily and will likely do so for the foreseeable future in Helsinki Italy. Conclusion: as few as three or four fellers with ropes and AKs could show up, use the latter to slay everyone in the joint, use the former to topple the accursed idol and flee. The risk of this grim scenario increases annually, with no credible end point other than David on the pavement, marble microshards by the millions, each containing countless nano-Davids which will remain forever encrusted in calcium carbonate. If the good guys can imagine this scenario, the bad guys can think of them far more easily. If such a thing occurs, I will be dismayed but not surprised. The article goes on about the risk of David taking a dive by natural factors but doesn?t say a word about what looks like a far bigger risk of his perishing by unnatural causes. My apologies for harshing your Sunday buzz. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Aug 21 21:37:54 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 16:37:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <019a01d1fbf0$a4b9fc30$ee2df490$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> <019a01d1fbf0$a4b9fc30$ee2df490$@att.net> Message-ID: as few as three or four fellers with ropes and AKs could show up, use the latter to slay everyone in the joint, spike Been to the Uffizi lately? When I went there was a startling number of guards in and out with Uzis. bill w On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 4:11 PM, spike wrote: > On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 12:45 PM, spike wrote: > > >? buddies coming by, Hey Mike! Whaddya doing dude? He would say > something like: chipping away everything that isn?t David. ? Every chip > contained smaller replicas of the big guy, ja? So how does he figure they > weren?t also rock encrusted Davids? And each chip of each smaller David > would itself contain still smaller Davids and way more of them, all the way > down to the calcium carbonate?spike > > > > > > > > The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. Sure this went off > on a rather lighthearted? eh? make that absurd note. But what if? David > did topple one day and spoil the day of perhaps dozens of admiring proles? > > > > Since this is an engineering-oriented discussion, let us go that route and > do some BOTECs, shall we? > > > > I have heard that David is about a triple scale if you assume the model > was a big guy, and a big guy is about 100 kg and the volume of a solid > scales as the cube of the linear dimension and so 3, 9, 27 times the volume > of the 100kg guy and marble has a density of about 2.7 compared to humans? > paltry 1 g/cc, so David would have a mass of about 7000 kg? Are you > getting about that number? 7 tons of David? > > > > OK then, we can do the same trick to estimate the cross sectional area of > the ankles, so a big guy might be about 10 cm by about 8 in roughly an > ellipse (no not that part, I meant the ankle), so about 60 cm^2, triple and > squared, we get around 500 cm^2 area per ankle times two ankles so about > 1000 cm^2 supporting about 7 tons of David or about 70 kN on about a tenth > of a square meter, so about 700 kPa, ja? Ha! Really a mere 700 kPa? To > stone that kind of pressure is child?s play! Rather for stone that would > be pebble?s play! > > > > Or would it? > > > > If you sat thru engineering school and didn?t learn about stress > concentration in ceramic materials, you weren?t listening, in a really > dangerous way. Two things I thought of: marble isn?t really very good as a > structural material. It is great for sculptures because of its beauty and? > it is easy to carve. Whyzat? Because it is relatively soft. Being stone, > stress concentration is a big deal. With a five meter lever arm between > ankles and neck, and an area moment of intertia small enough to obviate my > even bothering to post BOTECs, you can see it would be easy to create > sufficient stress concentrations to result in catastrophic structural > failure at his ankles. > > > > Once we have those numbers we can estimate how easy it would be for three > or four fidels to throw a rope over his neck and intentionally topple the > artwork. Perhaps they would see internet images of infidels walking > around, admiring it, women with heads uncovered, committing idolatry! This > is offensive of course, people walking in circles around a stone, and it > must be stopped. > > > > Keith?s evolutionary psychology-based theory on human behavior predicts > that fidels might be motivated to destroy an idol if it gave them status in > the eyes of their compatriots. The compatriot to adversary ratio increases > steadily and will likely do so for the foreseeable future in Helsinki > Italy. Conclusion: as few as three or four fellers with ropes and AKs > could show up, use the latter to slay everyone in the joint, use the former > to topple the accursed idol and flee. The risk of this grim scenario > increases annually, with no credible end point other than David on the > pavement, marble microshards by the millions, each containing countless > nano-Davids which will remain forever encrusted in calcium carbonate. > > > > If the good guys can imagine this scenario, the bad guys can think of them > far more easily. If such a thing occurs, I will be dismayed but not > surprised. > > > > The article goes on about the risk of David taking a dive by natural > factors but doesn?t say a word about what looks like a far bigger risk of > his perishing by unnatural causes. > > > > My apologies for harshing your Sunday buzz. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Aug 21 22:55:38 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 15:55:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> <019a01d1fbf0$a4b9fc30$ee2df490$@att.net> Message-ID: <01f701d1fbff$234f8020$69ee8060$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:38 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence >>?as few as three or four fellers with ropes and AKs could show up, use the latter to slay everyone in the joint, spike >?Been to the Uffizi lately? When I went there was a startling number of guards in and out with Uzis. billw Ja. Their strategy would be to get their own guys hired as guards. Then on command, they flee in all directions. Not that I am paranoid or anything, but if we fail to foresee the reasonable possibilities, the things valuable to us in this world are likely going to be a fading memory. BillW, you might be old enough to remember the immortal (almost) Casey Kasem, whiling away our misspent youth counting down Americaaaaaaan Top Fortyyyyyy? Casey?s real name is Kemal Amen Kasem, whose family is from Lebanon. His twin brother Ammed returned to the homeland, but the two so far geographically separated took similar career paths, with Ammed still hosting Arabiaaaan Top Fortyyyy. The other day I was listening to it and heard a tune which reminded me of one from my own misspent youth. Not understanding the language, I played it into that nifty voice-recognition Google translate function. The translated words came back as follows: Down doobeedoo down down, David?s coming down doobeedoodown down down, Breakin? up is whaaaat he?ll do Don?t stand next toooo That white statue, Or risk that it will fall on you, Then we fidels will start anew, ?Cause breakin? up is what he?ll do? We?ll do moooore than just a try, The guards with guns are gonna die, We?ll have no moooore big nekkid guy, Cause breakin? up is what he?ll do? Or something like that. Of course one can never trust these online translation programs. It might have been one of those swingy fun dance tunes so popular in that part of the world and just sounded like something that translated this way. A semi-serious note on such a grim topic (sheesh): a bunch of guys out front of the museum with Uzis is a start, but it is easy enough to foresee that still more guys with still more guns could succeed in ridding our world of a stunning and priceless work of art, and it isn?t just Michelangelo?s work at risk. We are seeing irreplaceable antiquities smashed to shards today. By Keith?s observations, this unimaginable destruction could kick into high gear. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 00:32:38 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 19:32:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <01f701d1fbff$234f8020$69ee8060$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> <00db01d1fbd3$ce3228c0$6a967a40$@att.net> <019a01d1fbf0$a4b9fc30$ee2df490$@att.net> <01f701d1fbff$234f8020$69ee8060$@att.net> Message-ID: Ja. Their strategy would be to get their own guys hired as guards. Then on command, they flee in all directions. spike Of course the guys with Uzis are the only security you see. Wanna bet they have more? Now carry my idea further: using the same technology and software, build a machine that can reproduce famous art works down to the tiniest brushstroke. So, in effect, famous pieces of art, not counting the Sphinx or the Tower of Pisa, will be as easily reproduced as music. I think the validation of original art depends a lot on the canvas age and such, so this should not throw the art world into a tizzy. Amazing coincidence re song. Never heard of the songster - not surprising given my lack of appreciation for pop music. So few things I like. Sometimes it's just annoying to be so picky, but what can you do? Are we through discussing teaching? I really wanted comments on my way. I did lecture, sort of, and that's going out of style some places. What I really wanted was to have all the students read the material before coming to class. Boy, then I could really teach. What the Ss that I had did was just backwards: go to class and try to get what the guy is saying, and go home and read about and try to put together what the teacher said and what the book said. That way the class has moved on to the next topic while the Ss still have questions about what I've covered. Awkward. Then they had only their fellow students to ask. But I never could get them to read beforehand, even using pop tests to motivate them. They just hated me for those pop tests. What was supposed to happen, and I told them at the start of the term: read the book (then go back to the beginning and study it), pencil in question marks at passages they did not understand, bring the book to class and go through it while I do my thing and ask your questions when we get to your marks. That's what I did starting sometime in college, and it worked well for me. But they used the old way: read the book the night before the test. bill w On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 5:55 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:38 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence > > > > >>?as few as three or four fellers with ropes and AKs could show up, use > the latter to slay everyone in the joint, spike > > > > >?Been to the Uffizi lately? When I went there was a startling number of > guards in and out with Uzis. billw > > > > > > > > Ja. Their strategy would be to get their own guys hired as guards. Then > on command, they flee in all directions. Not that I am paranoid or > anything, but if we fail to foresee the reasonable possibilities, the > things valuable to us in this world are likely going to be a fading memory. > > > > BillW, you might be old enough to remember the immortal (almost) Casey > Kasem, whiling away our misspent youth counting down Americaaaaaaan Top > Fortyyyyyy? > > > > Casey?s real name is Kemal Amen Kasem, whose family is from Lebanon. His > twin brother Ammed returned to the homeland, but the two so far > geographically separated took similar career paths, with Ammed still > hosting Arabiaaaan Top Fortyyyy. > > > > The other day I was listening to it and heard a tune which reminded me of > one from my own misspent youth. Not understanding the language, I played > it into that nifty voice-recognition Google translate function. The > translated words came back as follows: > > > > > > Down doobeedoo down down, > > David?s coming down doobeedoodown down down, > > Breakin? up is whaaaat he?ll do > > > > Don?t stand next toooo > > That white statue, > > Or risk that it will fall on you, > > Then we fidels will start anew, > > ?Cause breakin? up is what he?ll do? > > > > We?ll do moooore than just a try, > > The guards with guns are gonna die, > > We?ll have no moooore big nekkid guy, > > Cause breakin? up is what he?ll do? > > > > Or something like that. Of course one can never trust these online > translation programs. It might have been one of those swingy fun dance > tunes so popular in that part of the world and just sounded like something > that translated this way. > > > > A semi-serious note on such a grim topic (sheesh): a bunch of guys out > front of the museum with Uzis is a start, but it is easy enough to foresee > that still more guys with still more guns could succeed in ridding our > world of a stunning and priceless work of art, and it isn?t just > Michelangelo?s work at risk. We are seeing irreplaceable antiquities > smashed to shards today. By Keith?s observations, this unimaginable > destruction could kick into high gear. > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 22 01:29:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 18:29:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] khan again, was: RE: david statue coincidence Message-ID: <003701d1fc14$9ab3b8b0$d01b2a10$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace ? >?Are we through discussing teaching? Not at all, but keep in mind we are discussing two different things in a way. You are writing about teaching from a teacher?s point of view. I think I am hearing your argument that if a teacher?s job is to coach students to work online resources, that would be unrewarding as a career path. Entirely possible, but we are then discussing two different things, for you are a college professor, and I am thinking of an elementary school teacher with entirely different challenges. Not the least of these is that he has some of her fifth graders who are already waaaaay past her in some fields of study, while others struggle to read at their grade level, where the standards are modest to the point of being nearly comical. College students? goals haven?t changed and will not change. You know better than most of us that real interest in the topic you are trying to teach is rare. You are lucky to have a single student in a class of 25 who is genuinely interested in the topic, who will hang around after class and talk about the subject. I know this for in chemistry and some of my math classes, I was that guy. >?That's what I did starting sometime in college, and it worked well for me. But they used the old way: read the book the night before the test?bill w Ja, because your goals were to learn the material, and perhaps become a professor. I suspect most of your classmates had other goals. College students have a goal of getting sufficient credentials to get some mundane office drone job while freeing up as much time as possible for getting laid. I had a huge advantage in that department. I already knew that even if I had as much free time as had passed since the mid Jurassic period, my chances at getting laid were still so negligible as to make the investment scarcely worth the effort. I didn?t bother. This freed up money, spared me from embarrassment and heartbreak, freed up that time to think about actual course content. If there was some deal available to students whereby they could pay their entire tuition today and collect a diploma four years from now with no further requirements or demands on their time, plenty of them would take that deal in a heartbeat. This makes students perhaps the worst consumer group in history. This business opportunity was not lost on one of our current candidates for president. So BillW, you noted repeatedly that regardless of your efforts, students really wanted to just come to class, listen to your lectures, do nothing else, then the week before the midterm and final exam, read the material, cram in everything and hope for the best. That isn?t going to change my professor friend. It?s human nature. My guess is that regardless of what you did, you could never get very many of your students to actually get good value out of your course by reading the material beforehand. College students just don?t swing that way. This is a good argument for what I have been pointing out with my observations of an open-ended curriculum: it takes advantage of students actual interests and methods of study. It recognizes that study is an activity done only after the biological urges are satisfied. This isn?t meant as a criticism. I remember what it was like, struggling to concentrate while semen pressure threatened to blow the top of my head off. College is the age when that happens. The heavy lifting in the learning process should be mostly finished by that time. Our notions might at this time diverge, for your professorship was in areas not generally known to me, and not readily broken down into a number of discrete skills, such as Khan Academy?s 1040 identified skills necessary to claim mastery of mathematics through first semester calculus. I don?t know how that would be done for English literature, psychology, political science, or journalism. I don?t even know if it can be done. Those mysterious arts were taught up on the east end of campus. We math, physics, and engineering geeks didn?t go there, didn?t know anyone there, wouldn?t know of its existence other than being occasionally reminded we were banished to the west end of campus and we were weird. I don?t think we really were; we just dressed that way. Well, OK I was weird. But I like me like that. Besides my sweetheart was one of us. But back to reality, which can also be a fun place. My notion is that teaching the STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) disciplines can be done at triple the efficiency if the entire curriculum is designed end to end by one guy. We have been discussing a stunning work of art which was designed not by a fractured committee by one brilliant mind, one. I am not an artist myself, never carved anything other than soap. But I never cease to be amazed at the thought of a guy looking at a huge pillar of marble, envisioning David standing inside it, then freeing him of the overlying rock so effectively the result can practically get even hetero men turned on. Now that is an accomplishment. It was done by one guy with a vision. An example I was thinking of was a particular invention to which I am well acquainted: the saxophone. Other instruments evolved over time, but the sax was invented in 1846 by a singularly talented guy, Adolphe Sax. I played a replica of his original 1846 version and found it most remarkable how very similar it was to the modern version. He did a great job, just terrific. OK then, my real thrust in the Khan Academy thread was that given a sufficiently talented designer such as Sax and Michelangelo, a single designer could put together a complete curriculum which would be so much more efficient than the design by fractured committee alternatives that the result could teach children at triple the efficiency. It could allow them to achieve a similar level of mastery in a third the time investment, which leads me back to a concept I will introduce in my next post on the topic, after you have had time to think and respond, recognizing that we have two completely different topics running more or less in parallel. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Mon Aug 22 03:31:09 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 20:31:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/21/16 "spike" wrote: > It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a > ultraviolet LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because > then you could use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want I've seen this suggestion a few times on this list, so apparently y'all aren't aware that this work has been done already at Stanford, by Marc Levoy and his students. They presented their results at SIGGRAPH in 2000. One of the outcomes, was that they were able to look at the statue from virtual viewpoints that weren't previously possible in real space. They noticed that the expressions on the left and right sides of his face are telling different stories. His raised arm makes it hard for an observer on the ground to see both sides at once. Anyway, high-res scans are available. http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dmich-sig00/ Chris -- http://waitbutwhy.com/2016/03/cryonics.html caution: long Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From anders at aleph.se Sun Aug 21 20:37:34 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 21:37:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Humor: forever young Message-ID: A music video you might find amusing or irritating: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=837tx9UG1gQ (Now, the original Alphaville song was (a minor) part of the reason I became transhumanist. It played endlessly on radio during my formative years, and I felt it made total sense. ) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 22 04:08:34 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 21:08:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Chris Hibbert On 8/21/16 "spike" wrote: > It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a ultraviolet > LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because then you > could use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want... I think this was John Clark's notion, even though it has my name above it. >...I've seen this suggestion a few times on this list, so apparently y'all aren't aware that this work has been done already at Stanford... Wooohoooo! Go Stanford! You guys are really on the ball up there. And you don't even gobble up my tax dollars. Life is goooood... >...Anyway, high-res scans are available. http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dmich-sig00/ Chris -- Chris, if I hadn't already beaten this subject to death, do allow me to take another whack, orthogonal to the 3D mapping problem. David was an Israelite, who today we call Israelis, a slight variation in vocabulary. His enormous adversary Goliath was a Philistine; today he would be called a Palestinian. In light of these observations, is it any wonder that the real art is locked away out of public view, while the one on display is a replica? So back then, Israelite vs Philistine. Now, Israeli vs Palestinian. Shows to go ya: some things never change. Well, OK they do: now the Israelis have nukes. The original story has the little shepherd boy David defeating the big Goliath using technology. Today, well, some things really never change. In the long run, superior technology always wins. Be the side with the most and best technology. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 13:25:09 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 08:25:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> Message-ID: So back then, Israelite vs Philistine. Now, Israeli vs Palestinian. Shows to go ya: some things never change. Well, OK they do: now the Israelis have nukes. The original story has the little shepherd boy David defeating the big Goliath using technology. Today, well, some things really never change. In the long run, superior technology always wins. Be the side with the most and best technology. spike Here is a quote from an Israeli politician, I don't remember who, that has stuck in my brain and I think I know why: 'Tiny Israel' Yeah - look at the Arabian peninsula on a map. Tiny. The Arabs seemingly could overwhelm Israel with ease, but have been beaten in more than one war. They just can't stand it. What DNA differences do you think exist between Arab and Jew? I suspect very little. Nothing worse than getting beaten by your brother. bill w On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:08 PM, spike wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf > Of Chris Hibbert > > > On 8/21/16 "spike" wrote: > > > It wouldn't matter if David toppled if first you used a ultraviolet > > LIDAR to make precise measurements of the statue, because then you > > could use a 3D printer to make as many Davids as you want... > > > > I think this was John Clark's notion, even though it has my name above it. > > > >...I've seen this suggestion a few times on this list, so apparently y'all > aren't aware that this work has been done already at Stanford... > > > Wooohoooo! Go Stanford! You guys are really on the ball up there. And > you > don't even gobble up my tax dollars. Life is goooood... > > > >...Anyway, high-res scans are available. > > http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dmich-sig00/ > > Chris > -- > > > > Chris, if I hadn't already beaten this subject to death, do allow me to > take > another whack, orthogonal to the 3D mapping problem. > > David was an Israelite, who today we call Israelis, a slight variation in > vocabulary. His enormous adversary Goliath was a Philistine; today he > would > be called a Palestinian. > > In light of these observations, is it any wonder that the real art is > locked > away out of public view, while the one on display is a replica? > > So back then, Israelite vs Philistine. Now, Israeli vs Palestinian. Shows > to go ya: some things never change. Well, OK they do: now the Israelis > have > nukes. The original story has the little shepherd boy David defeating the > big Goliath using technology. Today, well, some things really never > change. > In the long run, superior technology always wins. Be the side with the > most > and best technology. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 13:42:36 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 06:42:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> References: <007901d1fbc1$ff9156f0$feb404d0$@att.net> Message-ID: Best wishes, Keith On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 8:37 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf > Of William Flynn Wallace > Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 7:58 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence > > > > In today's NYTimes: > > > > "The world's most famous statue may someday topple, done in by hairline > cracks in its ankles and tremors from a quake, traffic or millions of > tourists' feet." > > > > Can you hard science guys get moving faster on antigravity, please? > > > > Bill > > > > > > No need for mysterious physics BillW; I have an idea, rather two of them, > neither requiring anti-gravity. Allow me to offer a mechanical engineer?s > perspective please rather than a physics-based solution. > > > > We know that stone is very strong in compressive load; that stuff is great > for making mountains. This explains why nearly all mountains are made of > it. Stone is good in shear stress, which is why rock fractures look the way > they do (review your mechanical engineering books, that chapter on Mohr?s > Circle and measuring ratios of shear to compressive stress using Cauchy > stress tensor.) Marble (and stone in general) is not good at resisting > bending moment, which is why stone arches are arches instead of one block > going across horizontally: arches are in compression, straight across stone > would be in bending stress. > > > > But rock is in general terrible at tensile stress, really lousy at that. > This is why it is never used for tension elements. The old Greeks were > smart guys, but all they had for building material was stone. So? the old > timers didn?t build any structures anywhere which require tension elements. > > > > OK so the real problem here is that David?s ankles are in slight bending > moment loading, and might fail. > > > > First idea: calculate the center of gravity of the sculpture, then slightly > tilt the base so that both ankles are in compression loading only. Or get > it as close as we can. It is over-constrained, so we can?t get both ankles > in perfect compression-only loading, but it can be improved by slightly > tilting the base. The necessary tilt would scarcely be noticed, and > tourists would never know Michel didn?t plan it that way to start with, > perhaps at Mrs. Angelo?s suggestion. > > > > Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. Faced > with this enormous adversary (Goliath) most of us would piss. So, we add on > a urine stream in the form of structural steel painted yellow to reinforce > the statue and reduce bending moment at the ankles. > > > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 22 13:38:00 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 06:38:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> Message-ID: <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence So back then, Israelite vs Philistine?Be the side with the most and best technology. spike >?Here is a quote from an Israeli politician, I don't remember who, that has stuck in my brain and I think I know why: 'Tiny Israel' Yeah - look at the Arabian peninsula on a map. Tiny. The Arabs seemingly could overwhelm Israel with ease, but have been beaten in more than one war. They just can't stand it. What DNA differences do you think exist between Arab and Jew? I suspect very little. Nothing worse than getting beaten by your brother. bill w Ja. Genetically they are similar; memetically very different. Surrounded by hostiles in far superior numbers, Israel survives by a constant awareness that its existence depends completely on mastery of superior technology. Let us consider what that looks like from the point of view of the surrounding people. Taught from earliest childhood to despise this invading infidels, in their quieter moments of reflection they must wonder why it survives. It is clear enough that it is because it has attained a higher mastery of technology and science. The next question must be inevitable in many of their minds: So why haven?t we mastered their technology and science? What is stopping us from getting all the same force multipliers? Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the fatal combat? What do you suppose they tell themselves? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 14:12:42 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 09:12:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> Message-ID: So why haven?t we mastered their technology and science? What is stopping us from getting all the same force multipliers? Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the fatal combat? What do you suppose they tell themselves? spike Lies bill w On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 8:38 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > >? *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence > > > > > > > > > > So back then, Israelite vs Philistine?Be the side with the most > and best technology. spike > > > > >?Here is a quote from an Israeli politician, I don't remember who, that > has stuck in my brain and I think I know why: > > > > 'Tiny Israel' > > Yeah - look at the Arabian peninsula on a map. Tiny. > > The Arabs seemingly could overwhelm Israel with ease, but have been beaten > in more than one war. They just can't stand it. > > What DNA differences do you think exist between Arab and Jew? I suspect > very little. Nothing worse than getting beaten by your brother. > > bill w > > > > > > Ja. Genetically they are similar; memetically very different. Surrounded > by hostiles in far superior numbers, Israel survives by a constant > awareness that its existence depends completely on mastery of superior > technology. > > > > Let us consider what that looks like from the point of view of the > surrounding people. Taught from earliest childhood to despise this > invading infidels, in their quieter moments of reflection they must wonder > why it survives. It is clear enough that it is because it has attained a > higher mastery of technology and science. The next question must be > inevitable in many of their minds: So why haven?t we mastered their > technology and science? What is stopping us from getting all the same > force multipliers? Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the > day after the fatal combat? > > > > What do you suppose they tell themselves? > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 14:41:10 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 15:41:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> Message-ID: On 22 August 2016 at 14:38, spike wrote: > Let us consider what that looks like from the point of view of the > surrounding people. Taught from earliest childhood to despise this invading > infidels, in their quieter moments of reflection they must wonder why it > survives. It is clear enough that it is because it has attained a higher > mastery of technology and science. The next question must be inevitable in > many of their minds: So why haven?t we mastered their technology and > science? What is stopping us from getting all the same force multipliers? > Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the fatal > combat? > They already had them. Slings were a common long-range weapon in ancient times. They weren't toys. Military slings could kill at up to 200 yards distance. In this probably fictitious story David cheated by bringing a gun to a sword fight. He could have lobbed stones at Goliath all day long, running further away if heavily-armoured Goliath got too close. But really it was just one of many stories attributed to David after he became Israel's greatest hero. BillK From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 15:09:13 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 08:09:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 8:37 AM, spike wrote: snip > Second idea: Consider what David was about to do in that sculpture. Faced > with this enormous adversary (Goliath) The sling was a widely used military weapon over much of the ancient world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_%28weapon%29 The talk page is as interesting as the article. The world record distance, 437 m requires a launch speed of over 70 m/s. I suspect that I am the only one on this list who learned how to use a sling and thus has some idea of the real miracle of David killing Goliath. From the talk page, "Julius Ceasar tells of a badly wounded centurion hit in the face . . ." They are _hard_ to aim. The timing for letting the knot slip between fingers and thumb is in the ms/sub ms range. At the release point the projectile is moving fast in a fairly small circle. They take a great deal of skill to hit anything, it takes starting young and long practice. They are the classical weapon of shepherds; a predator will abandon sneaking up on sheep when a rock smashes into the ground near him even if he is not hit. Idle shepherds have a lot of time to learn to use them. There is still a lot of luck involved in hitting a small target with a sling. Keith PS Philistine news. http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/archaeology/1.729879 From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 15:20:36 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 08:20:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 6:38 AM, spike wrote: snip > Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the fatal > combat? Please don't confuse these. Totally different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot From gsantostasi at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 16:09:57 2016 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:09:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Humor: forever young In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We pinned the original song (as an anthem for the group) in our FB group "End Aging Now !" : https://www.facebook.com/groups/endagingnow/ Giovanni On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Anders wrote: > A music video you might find amusing or irritating: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=837tx9UG1gQ > > (Now, the original Alphaville song was (a minor) part of the reason I > became transhumanist. It played endlessly on radio during my formative > years, and I felt it made total sense. ) > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 22 16:14:54 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 09:14:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> Message-ID: <00a901d1fc90$525b7270$f7125750$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 7:41 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence On 22 August 2016 at 14:38, spike wrote: >>... Let us consider what that looks like from the point of view of the > surrounding people....What is stopping us from getting all the same force multipliers? > Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the > fatal combat? >... In this probably fictitious story David cheated by bringing a gun to a sword fight... His legendary victory redefined the notion of cheating. This had enormous impact. >...He could have lobbed stones at Goliath all day long, running further away if heavily-armoured Goliath got too close. But really it was just one of many stories attributed to David after he became Israel's greatest hero...BillK _______________________________________________ This in itself brings up a related but important point. Family histories shape the family. The deeds of the fathers shape the ethical foundation of the descendants. Consider Hebrew mythology. The patriarch Abraham sired two sons, Isaac and Ishmael, both of whom became the father of nations. The storyline soon forgets about Ishmael and follows Isaac and his sons, Esau and Jacob. Esau was the favored one, the big burly elder son, strong, manly was he, his father's favorite. Isaac was elderly and blind, so the younger trickster son hatched a plot to disguise himself as his older brother by putting sheepskins on his hands. Esau had hairy hands but Jacobs were smooth. He managed to fool the blind elderly Isaac, who conferred his blessing on Jacob, who then got outta town. Esau returned from the hunt, went in to receive the deathbed blessing from his elderly father who was powerless to undo the birthright blessing he had already given away to that shyster Jacob, who had already fled. All Isaac had left was a curse that had already been prepared for his younger son whose moral fiber was questionable at the time, clearly transitioned by the ruse to proven. His questionable morality now definitely deserved the prefix im. In the odd view of life in those days, the old man had only a blessing and a curse. The blessing had been stolen, so the other son is cursed. Weird. The blessed son prospered and the cursed son withered. Keep reading if you wish. It's all in Genesis chapter 25 and following. Blessed younger son took his stolen blessing and went to find a bride. Everything he touched turned to gold. He agreed to work for his uncle Laban for seven years for his younger daughter, Rachel. Not wanting to be stuck with a spinster daughter, Uncle Laban tricked his son in law by switching the bride and bride's maid, so that Jacob married the older daughter. Upon discovering the ruse, Jacob worked seven more years to obtain the younger daughter who he also married. Two wives. Sisters. The mind boggles. The story of Jacob is filled with accounts of uncle/nephew or son-in-law/father-in-law cheating each other, which is the point of my recounting the story. In our family histories, we make good guys out of all direct ancestors, even if they were not really good guys. Jacob is written up as the good guy, even though he was a liar and a cheater. His hapless uncle is also the father of the race, being the father of both brides. He too was a trickster. So... we have a case where family legends shaped the memetic foundation of a people. We have a meme that cheating in business is OK, so long as everyone prospers in the end (as both Jacob and his uncle/father-in-law did, by Jacob's simultaneously dishonest but clever business tactics.) Jacob's older wife Leah produced ten sons, his beloved younger wife Rachel (who also resorted to trickery) produced only the two, Benjamin and Joseph. These dozen sons formed the twelve tribes of Israel. Ten of those came to naught, but Benjamin and Joseph's tribes combined to form the mighty nation of Israel. Many generations later, David came along, slew the man who would have been a distant cousin if the story has any basis in fact. Still more generations passed, producing Daniel, whose story contained element borrowed from the patriarch and father of the nation Joseph. Still later, Jesus of Nazareth came along, among whose most remarkable achievements was somehow finding a dozen British guys living in the Middle East: James, John, Peter, and the others. To this day it is most mysterious how Jesus and those twelve Englishmen got there, what they were doing in Israel, and how they learned to speak with that marvelous and grammatically flawless royal Shakespearean dialect. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 16:43:03 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:43:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <00a901d1fc90$525b7270$f7125750$@att.net> References: <000001d1fc2a$da8aa3c0$8f9feb40$@att.net> <001b01d1fc7a$675f8d20$361ea760$@att.net> <00a901d1fc90$525b7270$f7125750$@att.net> Message-ID: .He could have lobbed stones at Goliath all day long, running further away if heavily-armoured Goliath got too close. But really it was just one of many stories attributed to David after he became Israel's greatest hero...BillK The story doesn't tell how many stones it took for David to score. I've read where Goliath would have been terrified facing a sling wielded by a shephard. Of maybe it was a sty he watched, and then Shepard the name, would have been Stewart, which means ward of the sty. trivia for today Throwing stones: read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress -- Heinlein. Computer operated ramp/sling tossed huge stones at Colorado until they gave in. I read lately where the military has a stone thrower that can generate immense speeds and kill at large distances with just stones - no explosives needed. Repeating history bill w On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:14 AM, spike wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf Of BillK > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 7:41 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] david statue coincidence > > On 22 August 2016 at 14:38, spike wrote: > >>... Let us consider what that looks like from the point of view of the > > surrounding people....What is stopping us from getting all the same > force multipliers? > > Why didn?t Goliath?s guys all take up slingshots the day after the > > fatal combat? > > >... In this probably fictitious story David cheated by bringing a gun to > a sword fight... > > His legendary victory redefined the notion of cheating. This had enormous > impact. > > >...He could have lobbed stones at Goliath all day long, running further > away if heavily-armoured Goliath got too close. But really it was just one > of many stories attributed to David after he became Israel's greatest > hero...BillK > > _______________________________________________ > > > This in itself brings up a related but important point. Family histories > shape the family. The deeds of the fathers shape the ethical foundation of > the descendants. > > Consider Hebrew mythology. The patriarch Abraham sired two sons, Isaac > and Ishmael, both of whom became the father of nations. The storyline soon > forgets about Ishmael and follows Isaac and his sons, Esau and Jacob. Esau > was the favored one, the big burly elder son, strong, manly was he, his > father's favorite. Isaac was elderly and blind, so the younger trickster > son hatched a plot to disguise himself as his older brother by putting > sheepskins on his hands. Esau had hairy hands but Jacobs were smooth. He > managed to fool the blind elderly Isaac, who conferred his blessing on > Jacob, who then got outta town. > > Esau returned from the hunt, went in to receive the deathbed blessing from > his elderly father who was powerless to undo the birthright blessing he had > already given away to that shyster Jacob, who had already fled. All Isaac > had left was a curse that had already been prepared for his younger son > whose moral fiber was questionable at the time, clearly transitioned by the > ruse to proven. His questionable morality now definitely deserved the > prefix im. In the odd view of life in those days, the old man had only a > blessing and a curse. The blessing had been stolen, so the other son is > cursed. Weird. The blessed son prospered and the cursed son withered. > > Keep reading if you wish. It's all in Genesis chapter 25 and following. > > Blessed younger son took his stolen blessing and went to find a bride. > Everything he touched turned to gold. He agreed to work for his uncle > Laban for seven years for his younger daughter, Rachel. Not wanting to be > stuck with a spinster daughter, Uncle Laban tricked his son in law by > switching the bride and bride's maid, so that Jacob married the older > daughter. Upon discovering the ruse, Jacob worked seven more years to > obtain the younger daughter who he also married. Two wives. Sisters. The > mind boggles. > > The story of Jacob is filled with accounts of uncle/nephew or > son-in-law/father-in-law cheating each other, which is the point of my > recounting the story. In our family histories, we make good guys out of > all direct ancestors, even if they were not really good guys. Jacob is > written up as the good guy, even though he was a liar and a cheater. His > hapless uncle is also the father of the race, being the father of both > brides. He too was a trickster. > > So... we have a case where family legends shaped the memetic foundation of > a people. We have a meme that cheating in business is OK, so long as > everyone prospers in the end (as both Jacob and his uncle/father-in-law > did, by Jacob's simultaneously dishonest but clever business tactics.) > > Jacob's older wife Leah produced ten sons, his beloved younger wife Rachel > (who also resorted to trickery) produced only the two, Benjamin and > Joseph. These dozen sons formed the twelve tribes of Israel. Ten of those > came to naught, but Benjamin and Joseph's tribes combined to form the > mighty nation of Israel. Many generations later, David came along, slew > the man who would have been a distant cousin if the story has any basis in > fact. Still more generations passed, producing Daniel, whose story > contained element borrowed from the patriarch and father of the nation > Joseph. > > Still later, Jesus of Nazareth came along, among whose most remarkable > achievements was somehow finding a dozen British guys living in the Middle > East: James, John, Peter, and the others. To this day it is most > mysterious how Jesus and those twelve Englishmen got there, what they were > doing in Israel, and how they learned to speak with that marvelous and > grammatically flawless royal Shakespearean dialect. > > spike > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 16:50:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:50:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Humor: forever young In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Anders, I enjoyed that. John K Clark On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Anders wrote: > A music video you might find amusing or irritating: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=837tx9UG1gQ > > (Now, the original Alphaville song was (a minor) part of the reason I > became transhumanist. It played endlessly on radio during my formative > years, and I felt it made total sense. ) > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Aug 22 17:02:04 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:02:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] khan again, was: RE: david statue coincidence In-Reply-To: <003701d1fc14$9ab3b8b0$d01b2a10$@att.net> References: <003701d1fc14$9ab3b8b0$d01b2a10$@att.net> Message-ID: you could never get very many of your students to actually get good value out of your course by reading the material beforehand. College students just don?t swing that way. spike Maybe the most enjoyable class I had from a studying standpoint was the first psychometrics course. the university required that profs keep their notes on file in the library, where we could go and copy them. So I sat in class with notes in hand while the prof went through them. I don't remember bugging him like I did most of my profs because it was all there and clear. Easy A. The best students liked what I did in a lot of upper level classes: I made up a list of questions for each chapter from which the test questions would be selected. Class time was spent answering those questions, which were all the questions I could think of for that material, so if they knew those answers they knew it all, and they never got a test question that surprised them. You might think that this was too easy, but it wasn't. The first test in one class yielded 23 Fs and one A, as I might have posted before. Then they got serious. Spike, you seem to be a lot like me: I bugged every teacher from high school on, and did not omit visiting them in their offices until they ran me off, which they rarely did. The ONLY guy who knew how to play a sax was Paul Desmond. Period. If I were a mean and nasty guy and could move in time, I'd go back and kill Adolph Sax. spike College is the age when that happens. The heavy lifting in the learning process should be mostly finished by that time. ?I don't get this. College is where you start getting into the upper levels of Bloom. ?I have the equivalent of 120 semester hours of psych and when I left grad school I really began to study. Sometimes I wonder how we are able to communicate at all. If we were on a committee together? ? ? we'd be talking at cross purposes a lot, I think, and that's why your idea of letting one guy design it all is interesting, but how can he know it all? "It all" would have to be just in certain areas, like math and science, or humanities, or behavior sciences. ? you could never get very many of your students to actually get good value out of your course by reading the material beforehand. College students just don?t swing that way. ?They do in grad school or they get out with a booby prize Master's degree? On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 8:29 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *?* > > > > >?Are we through discussing teaching? > > > > Not at all, but keep in mind we are discussing two different things in a > way. You are writing about teaching from a teacher?s point of view. I > think I am hearing your argument that if a teacher?s job is to coach > students to work online resources, that would be unrewarding as a career > path. Entirely possible, but we are then discussing two different things, > for you are a college professor, and I am thinking of an elementary school > teacher with entirely different challenges. Not the least of these is that > he has some of her fifth graders who are already waaaaay past her in some > fields of study, while others struggle to read at their grade level, where > the standards are modest to the point of being nearly comical. > > > > College students? goals haven?t changed and will not change. You know > better than most of us that real interest in the topic you are trying to > teach is rare. You are lucky to have a single student in a class of 25 who > is genuinely interested in the topic, who will hang around after class and > talk about the subject. I know this for in chemistry and some of my math > classes, I was that guy. > > > > >?That's what I did starting sometime in college, and it worked well for > me. But they used the old way: read the book the night before the > test?bill w > > > > Ja, because your goals were to learn the material, and perhaps become a > professor. I suspect most of your classmates had other goals. > > > > College students have a goal of getting sufficient credentials to get some > mundane office drone job while freeing up as much time as possible for > getting laid. I had a huge advantage in that department. I already knew > that even if I had as much free time as had passed since the mid Jurassic > period, my chances at getting laid were still so negligible as to make the > investment scarcely worth the effort. I didn?t bother. This freed up > money, spared me from embarrassment and heartbreak, freed up that time to > think about actual course content. > > > > If there was some deal available to students whereby they could pay their > entire tuition today and collect a diploma four years from now with no > further requirements or demands on their time, plenty of them would take > that deal in a heartbeat. This makes students perhaps the worst consumer > group in history. This business opportunity was not lost on one of our > current candidates for president. > > > > So BillW, you noted repeatedly that regardless of your efforts, students > really wanted to just come to class, listen to your lectures, do nothing > else, then the week before the midterm and final exam, read the material, > cram in everything and hope for the best. That isn?t going to change my > professor friend. It?s human nature. My guess is that regardless of what > you did, you could never get very many of your students to actually get > good value out of your course by reading the material beforehand. College > students just don?t swing that way. > > > > This is a good argument for what I have been pointing out with my > observations of an open-ended curriculum: it takes advantage of students > actual interests and methods of study. It recognizes that study is an > activity done only after the biological urges are satisfied. This isn?t > meant as a criticism. I remember what it was like, struggling to > concentrate while semen pressure threatened to blow the top of my head > off. College is the age when that happens. The heavy lifting in the > learning process should be mostly finished by that time. > > > > Our notions might at this time diverge, for your professorship was in > areas not generally known to me, and not readily broken down into a number > of discrete skills, such as Khan Academy?s 1040 identified skills necessary > to claim mastery of mathematics through first semester calculus. I don?t > know how that would be done for English literature, psychology, political > science, or journalism. I don?t even know if it can be done. Those > mysterious arts were taught up on the east end of campus. We math, > physics, and engineering geeks didn?t go there, didn?t know anyone there, > wouldn?t know of its existence other than being occasionally reminded we > were banished to the west end of campus and we were weird. I don?t think > we really were; we just dressed that way. Well, OK I was weird. But I > like me like that. Besides my sweetheart was one of us. > > > > But back to reality, which can also be a fun place. My notion is that > teaching the STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) disciplines can > be done at triple the efficiency if the entire curriculum is designed end > to end by one guy. We have been discussing a stunning work of art which > was designed not by a fractured committee by one brilliant mind, one. I am > not an artist myself, never carved anything other than soap. But I never > cease to be amazed at the thought of a guy looking at a huge pillar of > marble, envisioning David standing inside it, then freeing him of the > overlying rock so effectively the result can practically get even hetero > men turned on. Now that is an accomplishment. It was done by one guy with > a vision. > > > > An example I was thinking of was a particular invention to which I am well > acquainted: the saxophone. Other instruments evolved over time, but the > sax was invented in 1846 by a singularly talented guy, Adolphe Sax. I > played a replica of his original 1846 version and found it most remarkable > how very similar it was to the modern version. He did a great job, just > terrific. > > > > OK then, my real thrust in the Khan Academy thread was that given a > sufficiently talented designer such as Sax and Michelangelo, a single > designer could put together a complete curriculum which would be so much > more efficient than the design by fractured committee alternatives that the > result could teach children at triple the efficiency. It could allow them > to achieve a similar level of mastery in a third the time investment, which > leads me back to a concept I will introduce in my next post on the topic, > after you have had time to think and respond, recognizing that we have two > completely different topics running more or less in parallel. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Tue Aug 23 03:15:06 2016 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:15:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Thank you for contributing to the costs of maintaining this email list Message-ID: Fellow Extropians, I regret that I very rarely post to the List these days. However, I do dip into it and read fairly often... then feel bad because I don't participate. [Spike on Google Classroom -- and so many other topics; Anders on the beauty of the statue of David; John on Trump-eting the end of the world; and so much more.] A couple of weeks ago, while in New York, I spent several hours with Perry Metzger -- who originally started this list back in, um, 1992? 1991? Perry is doing what any sensible person would do in his second half-century: getting a doctorate in nanotechnology. I want to thank the several people -- all long-timers, I believe --who contributed recently to the costs of hosting this List. We're looking into moving it away from the unpleasant clutches of Network Solutions and securing it for the long haul. Onward! --Max -- Max More, PhD Strategic Philosopher Co-editor, *The Transhumanist Reader* http://www.amazon.com/Transhumanist-Reader-Contemporary-Technology-Philosophy/dp/1118334310/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372225570&sr=1-1&keywords=the+transhumanist+reader President & CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Aug 23 09:05:18 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 10:05:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Recycling in space Message-ID: <3c5ae5fb-eaaa-d243-65bd-4de7408f538b@aleph.se> It is a fairly old idea, but it is nice to see people working on actually recycling empty upper stage Atlas rocket fuel tanks as space habitats: http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/space-flight/nasa-funds-partnership-to-explore-making-space-habitats-out-of-used-rocket-fuel-tanks http://nanoracks.com/deep-space-habitats/ Sometimes the future is pre-used. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From sparge at gmail.com Tue Aug 23 11:42:17 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:42:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Transparent mice and brain scanning Message-ID: http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/see-through-mice-may-soon-substitute-live-animals-n635951 *Researchers have developed a way to make a mouse transparent ? by removing the liquids and fats from its tissue. * * They hope their method can be used to make a complete, unsliced model of a human brain, with all the delicate nerve connections untouched. And they say their see-through mouse might reduce the need for lab scientists around the world to kill living mice just to study their organs. * *"Now, for the first time, we have a powerful tool that can make the human brain transparent and reduce it size to fit an imaging microscope for mapping," Ali Ertu?rk, a brain researcher at Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich in Germany, said in written comments. * *The method, described in the journal Nature Methods, is called ultimate DISCO (short for 3-D imaging of solvent-cleared organs). It not only makes it possible to see entire structures in place, but shrinks the body so that it fits under a microscope. * * "We expect that this method is easily applicable to small monkeys, even to a whole human brain in the near future," Erturk wrote. * * "We all know the big fuss (rightfully) around mapping the human brain. But so far there is not any approach that even comes close to mapping any part of human brain at individual neuron level." * ... The video shows an imaged mouse nervous system. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 23 13:38:22 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 06:38:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Recycling in space In-Reply-To: <3c5ae5fb-eaaa-d243-65bd-4de7408f538b@aleph.se> References: <3c5ae5fb-eaaa-d243-65bd-4de7408f538b@aleph.se> Message-ID: <009201d1fd43$9e6c0310$db440930$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Subject: [ExI] Recycling in space >...It is a fairly old idea, but it is nice to see people working on actually recycling empty upper stage Atlas rocket fuel tanks as space habitats: http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/space-flight/nasa-funds-partner ship-to-explore-making-space-habitats-out-of-used-rocket-fuel-tanks http://nanoracks.com/deep-space-habitats/ Sometimes the future is pre-used. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Anders, back in the 80s, this was almost done. Plenty of us who are into this sort of thing already knew that when a space shuttle goes into orbit, it drops an external tank which is very nearly already to orbit speed. To carry it on up there requires sacrificing about a third of the maximum theoretical payload capability of an STS mission, but... that maximum theoretical limit wasn't used anyway: it was too scary. Should anything go even a little wrong on the way up on a max payload mission, they can find themselves suddenly with no way to get to orbit, no way to get rid of the payload, no way to turn about and return to the launch site, no place to ditch and even if they did make the emergency landing site, the payload would be too heavy to land; the hapless astronauts have about 20 minutes regret ever having gotten mixed up with NASA, choose a religion and pray for an afterlife, that sort of thing. Consequently, few STS missions were anywhere near fully loaded. So... most of those missions could have carried the external tank to orbit, at least a low one, without sacrificing anything at all. When the tank arrives in orbit, there is still both hydrogen and oxygen aboard for most missions. They sometimes use up all the LOX, but always have some H2, since they intentionally carry extra. At main engine cutoff, they pour left-over hydrogen through the engine to cool off the hot bits, flush out any remaining oxygen thus extending the life of the engines. A nice cool hydrogen bath is so refreshing after hoisting a space plane to orbit. We had a kind of a hobbyist group at Lockheed proposing uses for an empty tank in orbit (kicked around ideas after work, no fulltime charge numbers for that kind of work. I wrote a couple proposals.) There was the problem with that notion however. If they drop the tank in the usual way, they know where it will land: out in the Indian Ocean. But if they carry it to orbit, there are three choices: carry enough propellant for a periodic reboost and keep it there, bring along the tank's own guidance system and motor to de-orbit in a controlled fashion, or just let nature take its course and hope wherever it comes down it doesn't fall in some commie's backyard and trigger world war 3. The first two options were really expensive, the third offered about an even-money chance it would drop in the vast Pacific and no one would notice; very little chance of actually smiting some hapless prole. But NASA didn't like the risk and the bad publicity of it all, and wanted a really good justification to even do it once, just to show it could be done. So our group worked to find one. If you look at artist renderings of 80s versions of the space station, sometimes they will show STS external tanks nearby, or some might even show them attached to the station. One proposed piece of hardware was a spherical module with a means of attaching an STS tank. That notion got as far as a NASA funded engineering proposal team to get the design concept as far as preliminary design review (PDR) stage. A PDR requires enough detail to know dimensions, weight, all the details down to perhaps 10% uncertainty or closer on weight. I was lucky enough to work part time on that in 1989. We had a proposed design at the end of one of the space station modules which would attach a tank specially fitted with an access hatch. It was a really cool little project, very focused, small team. In that year the commies complied with Mr. Reagan's dramatic suggestion and tore down the Berlin wall. Both countries started acting like they didn't want to fight a nuclear war at all. That whole nuclear winter thing made plenty of us nervous. I am much more a summer fan, and the radioactive fallout is such a bother. Less publicity was given to a reduction in nuclear development which came along with Gorby's peaceful gesture, which freed up a bunch of nuclear engineers and scientists. We didn't want all those unemployed taxi-driving Dr. Nukeskys resettling in Iran, so a plan was hatched to make space scientists out of them. The outcome was the space station's orbit was raised to a higher inclination which made it to where the STS could carry less payload, but would allow the commies to get there from Baikonour. Both countries paid more for payload, as did the Europeans way up there in that northerly inclination, so it was a severe compromise, but weighed against sweeping up radioactive dust off the driveway before work every day, we supposed it was acceptable. The attempt to make rocket scientists out of nuclear scientists mostly failed, for although there may be a few vague similarities between the two disciplines, such as both hire lots of geeks, they are dissimilar enough to be generally unsuitable for cross-pollination. The Dr. Nukeskys made their way to Iran and Iraq anyway, but we converted to what then became the international space station. The Germans and the Japanese reconfigured their modules by combining and shortening them, then requested that if others did likewise, that they fit their module end to end with either another module or our external tank attachment facility. We didn't like it: when Germans and Japanese work together, bad things happen. The Ruskies were going to build a module (can you imagine?) and make a way for their capsules to dock, meaning we had to convert our good old American measurement system from furlongs and rods to meters with all those scary confusing prefixes such as "centi" and "milli" and "kilo" based on conversion factors like 10 and 1000 rather than the usual 2 and the intuitive American 17.3 as one naturally uses when converting from hogsheads per fortnight to Kensington cubits per square buggywhip. The end result was a redesign of the station known as the Price-Fischer configuration, often derisively called the Fisher-Price configuration, to call attention to the fact that the station was so downscaled as to no longer be a useful research facility, with most of the science experiments canceled. The Fisher-Price International station was little more than just an expensive toy. Plans to haul an external tank were abandoned, our tank attachment module project was cancelled before we even got to pitch it at PDR, a critical feature of the program was cancelled: in the Price Fischer design, the International space station was closed-ended. Most space station engineers were told to run along and play elsewhere, at which time (paradoxically) plenty of us went from NASA work to defense-related stuff. I went into electronics manufacturing for a while, which was educational but far outside my expertise, then went into a plowshares group where we were trying to find logical uses for retired military space hardware which was available to us for a nickel on the dollar down to as little as free, if we could figure out something fun to do with it. We wrote proposals until our pencils wore out, never did come up with economical and peaceful ways to repurpose stuff originally designed to destroy the world. Previously the station was required to be open-ended, so that excess available space shuttle payload capacity could be used to take stuff up there and park it at the station, so that we could accumulate materials at the station for later missions which hadn't even yet been dreamed up. That was all gone. The new station was closed-ended, sneaky commies floating around all over the place inside, and nowhere to park an external tank. Gone. All that cool space stuff sacrificed, all just to save a few hundred billion dollars and help prevent one little nuclear holocaust. Anders, that's a geek's eye view of tanks in space. spike From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 23 16:26:42 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:26:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] quotes for yanks in 2016 Message-ID: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> I thought of two comments you may freely quote. Say nice things about me if you do. I as a libertarian oppose both mainstream candidates for opposite reasons. One for what he might do based on what he has said; the other for what she has already done in contradiction to what she has said. In 2016, Americans face a dilemma: the risk that one candidate is lying vs the risk the other is telling the truth. The probability of both approaches certainty. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Aug 23 16:56:21 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 11:56:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] quotes for yanks in 2016 In-Reply-To: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> References: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:26 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > I thought of two comments you may freely quote. Say nice things about me > if you do. > > > > > > I as a libertarian oppose both mainstream candidates for opposite > reasons. One for what he might do based on what he has said; the other for > what she has already done in contradiction to what she has said. > > > > > > In 2016, Americans face a dilemma: the risk that one candidate is lying vs > the risk the other is telling the truth. The probability of both > approaches certainty. > > > > > > spike > ?I beg to differ. You have stated a false dichotomy - both are telling the truth and both are lying. I think this is the certainty. Now as to whose subset of lying is bigger, or whose subset of telling the truth is bigger, then you can make a case.? ?Is it lying when you tell people what you want to accomplish when in fact there is little hope of that actually occurring if you get elected?? I say no - it reveals your values, or at least the values you want the public to think you have - which is demagoguery. Now if you believe your own lies, then you are loco (some would call this normal). And you don't think that you are lying. "No, wait, it was only sarcasm." ?bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 23 17:12:51 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:12:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] quotes for yanks in 2016 In-Reply-To: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> References: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:26 PM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > I thought of two comments you may freely quote. Say nice things about me > if you do. > > I as a libertarian oppose both mainstream candidates for opposite > reasons. One for what he might do based on what he has said; the other for > what she has already done in contradiction to what she has said. > It would be nice if we had more real options in 2016 but the fact of the matter is there are only 2 flavors of ice cream to choose from, we can have vanilla or syphilitic baboon anus. I think I'll pick vanilla. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 23 17:52:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 10:52:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] quotes for yanks in 2016 In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00c001d1fd67$1e395e30$5aac1a90$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?Now if you believe your own lies, then you are loco (some would call this normal). And you don't think that you are lying. "No, wait, it was only sarcasm." Billw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ heeeeeeeehehehehehehheeeeeee? We hafta laugh, otherwise we will weep. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 23 19:37:28 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 12:37:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Recycling in space In-Reply-To: <3c5ae5fb-eaaa-d243-65bd-4de7408f538b@aleph.se> References: <3c5ae5fb-eaaa-d243-65bd-4de7408f538b@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Aug 23, 2016 4:40 AM, "Anders" wrote: > It is a fairly old idea, but it is nice to see people working on actually recycling empty upper stage Atlas rocket fuel tanks as space habitats: > > http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/space-flight/nasa-funds-partnership-to-explore-making-space-habitats-out-of-used-rocket-fuel-tanks > > http://nanoracks.com/deep-space-habitats/ If this follows historical trends, NASA will spend lots of money on theoretical designs (which will take small inspiration from past efforts but will mostly be new work), and then find some reason to defund it before it could actually be put into practice, after funnelling as much money as they can justify to contractors. The difference this time: private actors might be able to carry it the rest of the way, without NASA's funding or permission. These rocket fuel tanks might not belong to those who believe the status quo is more profitable than progress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 23 22:01:32 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:01:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] quotes for yanks in 2016 In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d1fd5b$22bf2ae0$683d80a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <008601d1fd89$e94f24c0$bbed6e40$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?It would be nice if we had more real options in 2016 but the fact of the matter is there are only 2 flavors of ice cream to choose from, we can have vanilla or syphilitic baboon anus. I think I'll pick vanilla. John K Clark As would we all, were it that easy to tell which was which. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 01:26:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 21:26:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies Message-ID: ?Some say? they can't vote for Clinton because she's untrustworthy and tells lies, and she has been known to, ah, test the elasticity of the truth from time to time, but her fibs are nothing compared to the whoppers told by Donald Trump. *?TRUMP'S LIE* ? " *I? ?was always against going into Iraq. In fact, I ? believe me, I was always against it.*? ? Trump says his ? opposition ? to ? the ? Iraq war was *"loud and clear"* before March 19 2003 when it started and there were *"25 newspaper stories proving it"* *THE TRUTH* No such newspaper articles have ever been found nor any other evidence that shows Trump opposed the war before it started. *TRUMP'S LIE* Trump claims before the was started he claims " *I said, do not go to Iraq you are going to destabilize the Middle East. That is exactly what happened.? * *THE TRUTH * There is no evidence Trump said anything of the sort, however we do know for certain that 6 months before the war started Trump was asked if he supported invading Iraq Trump replied *"Yeah, I guess so".* *TRUMP"S LIE* Trump says Barack Obama was not born in the USA and he can prove it so Obama is not the legitimate president. *THE TRUTH* Obama was, he can't, and the President is. *TRUMP'S LIE* Ted Cruz's father helped assassinate John F Kennedy *THE TRUTH* He didn't. *?**TRUMP'S LIE* Trump said ?ISIS is honoring President Barack Obama ? because he is LITERALLY the founder of ISIS and Hillary Clinton is ?the ? co-founder ?. *THE TRUTH* They aren't. *?**TRUMP'S LIE* ?*"Hillary is?* * responsible for making Iran the dominant power in the Middle East and on the road to nuclear weapons.?* *THE TRUTH* Iran?s nuclear program ? is stopped ? for at least a decade ? thanks to Obama and Hillary's Iran deal. ? Iran is further away from making a nuclear weapon than it was on the day Trump started his presidential campaign. *TRUMP'S LIE* *?"?China has total control, just about, of North Korea.?* *THE TRUTH? * Unfortunately China doesn't. *TRUMP'S LIE* *?" ?Even our nuclear arsenal doesn?t work.?* *THE TRUTH? * Unfortunately ? it does.? TRUMP'S LIE *?Our military is very depleted. Extremely depleted.?* *THE TRUTH? * *?*The USA spends more ? on the military than the next 7 biggest spending countries put together. *TRUMP'S LIE* *??* *"Hillary Clinton ?said? she wants to, raise taxes on the middle class. "* *?THE TRUTH* Hillary Clinton never said anything of the sort. *TRUMP?'S LIE?* ?? *"We don't know anything about Hillary in terms of religion. Now, she's been in the public eye for years and years, and yet there's no ? there's nothing out there."* *?THE TRUTH* There is something out there and it's easy to find, Wikipedia says she's a Methodist *TRUMP'S LIE * " *For the amount of money Hillary Clinton would like to spend on refugees, we could rebuild every inner city in America.?"?* *?THE TRUTH* You couldn't. *TRUMP'S LIE* *"The Obama administration was actively supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq, the terrorist group that became the Islamic State."* *THE TRUTH* They weren't. *TRUMP'S LIE* *"Crime is rising.?"* *THE TRUTH* Crime is falling. *TRUMP'S LIE* ?"? It is Hillary Clinton's agenda ?? to release the violent criminals from jail. She wants them all released." *?THE TRUTH* She doesn't? *TRUMP'S LIE* *"Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. The number's probably 28, 29, as high as 35. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent."* *?THE TRUTH* ?Not even close. *TRUMP'S LIE* ? ?*"?C* *rime statistics show blacks kill 81 percent of white homicide victims.?"* *THE TRUTH* The FBI says it's 15% not 81%. *TRUMP'S LIE* *?"I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering" as the World Trade Center collapsed.?"* *THE TRUTH* Nobody else on the? ?on the planet can remember seeing those thousands and thousands of people ?. *TRUMP'S LIE* *"?I? can eliminate? the entire 18 thousand billion dollar national debt in 8 years."* *THE TRUTH* Nobody can do that, and it would be very bad if anybody even tried. *TRUMP'S LIE* ?"? Clinton raised $60 million in July from just 20 people ?" ? ? *?THE TRUTH?* ?? ?Not 20 but ? 900,000 ?people ? made donations ? to Clinton in July, and one of them was me.? *TRUMP'S? LIE* * ?We have no intelligence gathering information. We need this information so badly. Obama stopped it.?* ?THE TRUTH? ?Obama ? spent $50.4 billion on intelligence ? gathering information? in 2015 ? and wants to spend even more in 2016.? *TRUMP'S LIE* *?Putin?s not going into Ukraine, OK. Just so you understand: He?s not going to go into Ukraine, all right?? * *?THE TRUTH* Putin did go into the Ukraine, and he did so 29 months BEFORE he told the above lie. *TRUMP'S LIE* *?"?ISIS is ?making a fortune with Libyan oil.?"?* *?THE TRUTH? * I?SIS has vandalized oil fields but it has never even tried to produce oil or sell any. *TRUMP'S LIE* ?*"?* *I never met Putin ? I don?t know who Putin is? ?I have no relationship with him?,?? ?I have no relationship with him?"? *7/31/16 *TH* *?E TRUTH*? In 2013, ?Trump said? said, ?"*?* *I do have a relationship* *? with Putin"*. In 2014 ?Trump? said, *?"?I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin and ?he gave me a present"*. In 2015, ?Trump? said, *?I got to know him very well* *?".*? *TRUMP'S LIE* *?I would have stayed out of Libya.?"* *THE TRUTH* ?In 2011 Trump said ? ?*" F* *ailing to intervene in Libya would be a major, major black eye for this country. We should stop this guy, which would be very easy and very quick. Libya could end up one of the worst massacres in history, and it would be very easy to topple Qaddafi. You talk about things that have happened in history; this could be one of the worst,? ?Now we should go in, we should stop this guy, which would be very easy and very quick. We could do it surgically, stop him from doing it, and save these lives. After it?s all done, the protesters who took over the country would reimburse us through oil.?* There are lots more examples I could list, but life is short. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 01:33:20 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:33:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies ?Some say? they can't vote for Clinton because she's untrustworthy and tells lies, and she has been known to, ah, test the elasticity of the truth from time to time, but her fibs are nothing compared to the whoppers told by Donald Trump. ?TRUMP'S LIE ?? There are lots more examples I could list, but life is short. John K Clark So don?t vote for them John. Can you show me Johnson and Stein?s lies? Neither can I. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 02:30:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 22:30:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:33 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > Can you show me Johnson and Stein?s lies? ?No, because I haven't bothered to look. Neither has a chance to be president so I don't care if they lie or not. In 2012 Nate Silver's 538 website correctly predict ?ed every? presidential race outcome in every state ?and? ?in ? the District of Columbia ?, a perfect record, and this year Silver says there is a ?76.3 % chance Hillary Clinton ? will be the next president and a 23.7% chance Donald Trump will be the next president and Johnson and Stein are not even rounding errors. ? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#plus ? ? John K Clark? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 02:36:12 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 22:36:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481 "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" lol On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:30 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:33 PM, spike wrote: > > ?> ? >> Can you show me Johnson and Stein?s lies? > > > ?No, because I haven't bothered to look. Neither has a chance to be > president so I don't care if they lie or not. In 2012 Nate Silver's 538 > website > correctly predict > ?ed every? > presidential race outcome in every state > ?and? > > ?in ? > the District of Columbia > ?, a perfect record, and this year Silver says there is a ?76.3 % chance > Hillary Clinton > ? will be the next president and a 23.7% chance Donald Trump will be the > next president and Johnson and Stein are not even rounding errors. ? > > http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid= > rrpromo#plus ? > > > ? John K Clark? > > > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 02:42:21 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:42:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <006a01d1fdb1$241e4fa0$6c5aeee0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 7:36 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump's lies Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481 "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" Lol {8^D Thanks for that Will. I may have been taken in by Stein because of her looks. She is far better looking than Johnson. {8^D It surprises me that a Green would oppose nuclear plants however. They are the cleanest energy we know how to make other than space based solar. I woulda thought Greens would be in favor of them. I won?t vote for Stein just for being attractive. I haven?t studied Stein?s position on energy. Do you know how she proposes to replace coal? Has she any idea of the land are we will need to blanket with those things if we try to go that route? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 03:14:58 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:14:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies Message-ID: <00b001d1fdb5$b2abda90$18038fb0$@att.net> From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] ? >?I haven?t studied Stein?s position on energy. Do you know how she proposes to replace coal? Has she any idea of the land are we will need to blanket with those things if we try to go that route? spike OK I had the brilliant idea of finding out Stein?s position by? like? going to her website. Here are her energy positions. I am not an economist or a political science major. I may be more qualified to comment on energy policy than the other categories so I will. None of this will work: * "All of the above" policy puts fossil fuels above all. (Jan 2016) * Climate change causes record storms, floods, and drought. (Jan 2016) * Immediate halt in all new fossil fuel exploration. (Oct 2015) * Completely zero out climate emissions, as fast as possible. (Jun 2015) * Make wars for oil obsolete: 100% renewables by 2030. (Feb 2015) * Fight against climate change instead of fighting for oil. (Oct 2012) * Weatherizing homes creates jobs & addresses climate change. (Oct 2012) * We can't wait 4 more years to address climate change. (Jan 2012) * National ban on fracking; natural gas is not clean. (Jan 2012) * No evidence that carbon sequestration solves climate crisis. (Jan 2012) * Let states prevent nuclear power plants. (Jan 2012) * World War II-scale mobilization to reduce carbon burden. (Jan 2012) * Renewable energy is win-win for economy & national security. (Dec 2011) * Nuclear energy is dirty, dangerous and expensive. (Dec 2011) * Logging wood for electricity is neither clean nor green. (Sep 2010) It doesn?t even mention space based solar, and kinda tries to pretend that we can stop burning coal, stop exploring for new oil, stop fracking, build no new nuke plants, and somehow make up the difference with ?renewables.? 100% renewables by 2030? Heh. We would be lucky to make that goal by 2130. OK so what renewables? Falling water? We have already tapped the best sources. Wind power? Better than nothing but anyone who flies over the country and looks down already knows that most of the time those things aren?t even turning even on breezy days. What is left? Ground based solar? Well how much power does Stein think we can make that way? Has she ever done the calcs? Does she not realize that solar also has its environmental costs? Before I drop the topic, check out second from the bottom bullet. Nuclear power is not dirty. It is dangerous perhaps but compared to all the alternatives, that isn?t clear to me. Expensive? Every option is expensive other than coal, and we know that has its environmental costs. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 03:41:33 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:41:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> On Aug 23, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481 > > "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" Do you feel she's lying there? Lying would mean she believes otherwise, but is presenting that position as if it were true. In her case, I'm guessing she probably really does hold that view. This isn't to say she never lies, but this might be an example. Also, I just presume all politicians are liars. Makes life easier and makes for a pleasant surprise when a politician is caught not lying about something. (In such cases, of course, they might be saying something unpopular, so perhaps the blame should be on the electorate which seems to prefer the right kind of lies to unpopular truths.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 03:27:10 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:27:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies Message-ID: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> This is the man that is an order of magnitude closer to my thinking than any of the others: http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm I took those ISideWith quizzes and Johnson came out by far the closest match to my views every time regardless of which areas I chose to detail: https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz Looks like Libertarians might get on the ballot in all 50 this year, excellent! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 04:14:53 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 21:14:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> References: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:27 PM, spike wrote: > > Looks like Libertarians might get on the ballot in all 50 this year, > excellent! > I thought they and the Greens already were? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 04:31:36 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 21:31:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> Message-ID: <002601d1fdc0$6733ef20$359bcd60$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:15 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:27 PM, spike > wrote: Looks like Libertarians might get on the ballot in all 50 this year, excellent! I thought they and the Greens already were? The Libertarians probably will get ballot access in all 50, the Greens will probably not. Last I heard, the score was 41 for Libertarian and good chance they will be on all. Currently 33 states for Green, thought they would hit about 40. Johnson was confident he would get on there in all 50. The real key I think is if Johnson can manage to get into the national level debates. If he does, I think the contrast between the others will be astonishing. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that it is a long shot. There are scenarios I can imagine however: Clinton orders a hit on Trump and is somehow caught. There is a debate over whether murder is still technically a crime if the perpetrator?s name is Clinton, divided opinion on the matter split along party lines, convicted by a narrow margin. Both of those two are out of the picture. Then Johnson has a good chance. Alternative scenario: this most recent email dump of 15000 messages turn up an explanation for how Huma Abedin was being paid in the Civil Service in accordance with a Brigadier General when her credentials were saying First Lieutenant. Then we get to debate another topic entirely: if Clinton has already beaten more serious charges, do lesser charges even count, even if proven? If so, then it becomes a race between Trump and Johnson. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 05:24:49 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 22:24:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <002601d1fdc0$6733ef20$359bcd60$@att.net> References: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> <002601d1fdc0$6733ef20$359bcd60$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:31 PM, spike wrote: > I am realistic enough to acknowledge that it is a long shot. There are > scenarios I can imagine however: Clinton orders a hit on Trump and is > somehow caught. There is a debate over whether murder is still technically > a crime if the perpetrator?s name is Clinton, divided opinion on the matter > split along party lines, convicted by a narrow margin. Both of those two > are out of the picture. Then Johnson has a good chance. > > > > Alternative scenario: this most recent email dump of 15000 messages turn > up an explanation for how Huma Abedin was being paid in the Civil Service > in accordance with a Brigadier General when her credentials were saying > First Lieutenant. Then we get to debate another topic entirely: if Clinton > has already beaten more serious charges, do lesser charges even count, even > if proven? If so, then it becomes a race between Trump and Johnson. > You'd prefer it if both Clinton and Trump were arrested (which would not fail to make front page national news) before November, eh? Quite a lot of Americans feel the same way. But I suspect, even if that were to happen tomorrow, they were tried and convicted within the next month, and were still doing time come Election Day, our state's electors would still go for Clinton. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 05:40:57 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 22:40:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Aug 23, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Will Steinberg > wrote: > > Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/ > 715230945679380481 > > "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be > detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" > > > Do you feel she's lying there? Lying would mean she believes otherwise, > but is presenting that position as if it were true. In her case, I'm > guessing she probably really does hold that view. > Unfortunately, if we excuse "but they really, honestly believe it, regardless of what the facts say", there have been a few studies showing Trump may be psychopathic enough that, by that standard, he is incapable of lying: he can convince himself of whatever he believes is expedient at that moment, regardless of external fact or even his own personal experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 05:50:55 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 22:50:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Aug 23, 2016, at 10:40 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: >>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: >>> Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481 >>> >>> "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" >> >> Do you feel she's lying there? Lying would mean she believes otherwise, but is presenting that position as if it were true. In her case, I'm guessing she probably really does hold that view. > > Unfortunately, if we excuse "but they really, honestly believe it, regardless of what the facts say", there have been a few studies showing Trump may be psychopathic enough that, by that standard, he is incapable of lying: he can convince himself of whatever he believes is expedient at that moment, regardless of external fact or even his own personal experience. I was focusing on Jill Stein above. My point is that she may actually believe what she tweeted -- and not in some crazy, psychopathogical sense of believe, but in the pedestrian sense. I don't know enough about her, but I'm guessing she's just accepting opinions offered by her crowd -- the same crowd that believes a host of other anti-nuclear power views. I'm not a Trump supporter, so you don't have to sell me on his character flaws. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 06:21:21 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:21:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > I was focusing on Jill Stein above. My point is that she may actually > believe what she tweeted -- and not in some crazy, psychopathogical sense > of believe, but in the pedestrian sense. I don't know enough about her, but > I'm guessing she's just accepting opinions offered by her crowd -- the same > crowd that believes a host of other anti-nuclear power views. > At what point does denial of reality shift from "crazy, psychopathological" to "pedestrian sense"? The facts - as offered by neutral, third party analyses - favor nuclear power. Any serious contender for US President has the responsibility to have access to such analyses, and to have read them, so this is information she should have and be acting on. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 06:33:50 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:33:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <5FD1DE46-A014-4978-9216-AAFACEBE54CE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1B4B7E4B-CD2D-4927-895C-9201C282FD23@gmail.com> On Aug 23, 2016, at 11:21 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: >> I was focusing on Jill Stein above. My point is that she may actually believe what she tweeted -- and not in some crazy, psychopathogical sense of believe, but in the pedestrian sense. I don't know enough about her, but I'm guessing she's just accepting opinions offered by her crowd -- the same crowd that believes a host of other anti-nuclear power views. > > At what point does denial of reality shift from "crazy, psychopathological" to "pedestrian sense"? The facts - as offered by neutral, third party analyses - favor nuclear power. Any serious contender for US President has the responsibility to have access to such analyses, and to have read them, so this is information she should have and be acting on. I'd want more information on her before claiming she was crazy rather than ignorant or stupid. I make and made no claims about her being a 'serious contender.' What does that even mean here? And wouldn't that be another thing to decide rather than just presume so that you can arrive at your armchair diagnosis? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlatorra at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 09:37:55 2016 From: mlatorra at gmail.com (Michael LaTorra) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 05:37:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for Gary Johnson. Hillary backers who say "A vote for Johnson is a vote for Trump" are not doing the math. Mike LaTorra On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:30 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:33 PM, spike wrote: > > ?> ? >> Can you show me Johnson and Stein?s lies? > > > ?No, because I haven't bothered to look. Neither has a chance to be > president so I don't care if they lie or not. In 2012 Nate Silver's 538 > website > correctly predict > ?ed every? > presidential race outcome in every state > ?and? > > ?in ? > the District of Columbia > ?, a perfect record, and this year Silver says there is a ?76.3 % chance > Hillary Clinton > ? will be the next president and a 23.7% chance Donald Trump will be the > next president and Johnson and Stein are not even rounding errors. ? > > http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid= > rrpromo#plus ? > > > ? John K Clark? > > > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Wed Aug 24 14:03:34 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 10:03:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] English corpora Message-ID: <201608241429.u7OETi5o002496@ziaspace.com> Do you know of a free corpus for English from which I could, with negligible effort, pull lists of words by part of speech in declining frequency order? For example, a list of the 1,000 most-frequently-used verbs or the 5,000 most-frequently-used nouns. There are massive, wonderful corpora for in-depth language projects and simple short lists by part of speech but it's not obvious where I can just set N and part of speech and get my list. -- David. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 14:49:37 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:49:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] English corpora In-Reply-To: <201608241429.u7OETi5o002496@ziaspace.com> References: <201608241429.u7OETi5o002496@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: It's possible you can do this with Moby Lexicon, but I really don't know. I know the guy who compiled the list if you want a pointer to him. Best wishes, Keith On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:03 AM, David Lubkin wrote: > Do you know of a free corpus for English from which I could, with negligible > effort, pull lists of words by part of speech in declining frequency order? > For example, a list of the 1,000 most-frequently-used verbs or the 5,000 > most-frequently-used nouns. > > There are massive, wonderful corpora for in-depth language projects and > simple short lists by part of speech but it's not obvious where I can just > set N and part of speech and get my list. > > > -- David. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 14:46:49 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:46:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] moving story Message-ID: <00b801d1fe16$59150360$0b3f0a20$@att.net> Heeeeeehehehehehheeeeee? We hafta laugh. Otherwise we cry. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31862 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 15:27:14 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:27:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] moving story In-Reply-To: <00b801d1fe16$59150360$0b3f0a20$@att.net> References: <00b801d1fe16$59150360$0b3f0a20$@att.net> Message-ID: On 24 August 2016 at 15:46, spike wrote: > > We hafta laugh. Otherwise we cry. > You have to laugh when a Roomba goes mad.......... BillK From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 16:00:11 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 09:00:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] moving story In-Reply-To: References: <00b801d1fe16$59150360$0b3f0a20$@att.net> Message-ID: <20E31C6F-75B8-4AA0-94F8-ED043056439E@gmail.com> On Aug 24, 2016, at 8:27 AM, BillK wrote: >> On 24 August 2016 at 15:46, spike wrote: >> >> We hafta laugh. Otherwise we cry. > > You have to laugh when a Roomba goes mad.......... > > It's only funny when it hasn't happened to you. ;) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 16:18:22 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:18:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: Well, in Stein's case...... https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/ > 715230945679380481 > > "Nuclear power plants = weapons of mass destruction waiting to be > detonated. Time to shut them down. #EndNukes" > Stein ? also believes wi-fi is killing children: http://www.sciencealert.com/us-presidential-candidate-jill-stein-thinks-wi-fi-is-a-threat-to-children-s-health Stein doesn't like vaccinations, something that has saved the lives of hundreds of millions of people, but she does like crackpot science like homeopathy: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/07/jill-stein-promotes-homeopathy-panders-on-vaccines/ John K Clark ? > > lol > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:30 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:33 PM, spike wrote: >> >> ?> ? >>> Can you show me Johnson and Stein?s lies? >> >> >> ?No, because I haven't bothered to look. Neither has a chance to be >> president so I don't care if they lie or not. In 2012 Nate Silver's 538 >> website >> correctly predict >> ?ed every? >> presidential race outcome in every state >> ?and? >> >> ?in ? >> the District of Columbia >> ?, a perfect record, and this year Silver says there is a ?76.3 % chance >> Hillary Clinton >> ? will be the next president and a 23.7% chance Donald Trump will be the >> next president and Johnson and Stein are not even rounding errors. ? >> >> http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/? >> ex_cid=rrpromo#plus ? >> >> >> ? John K Clark? >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 16:38:13 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:38:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael LaTorra wrote: ?> ? > With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for > Gary Johnson. > ?The only way a rational person could vote for Gary Johnson would be if they believed there ?be no effective difference between a Trump presidency and a Clinton presidency. But if they believed that then they wouldn't be rational. Johnson has no chance of becoming president, but he does have a chance of being a factor in determining who will be the next one, and it is VASTLY more important to avoid a apocalyptic president than it is to elect a good one. If he wins then for the next 4 years your personal survival will be a function of the intelligence, knowledge, and emotional stability of Donald Trump. Are you comfortable with that? Imagine what would have happened if Trump was president in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crises instead of Kennedy! John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 16:50:06 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:50:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: Give it a rest, John. You're not convincing anyone and you're annoying and offending at least me, almost certainly others. -Dave On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:38 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael LaTorra > wrote: > > ?> ? >> With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for >> Gary Johnson. >> > > ?The only way a rational person could vote for Gary Johnson would be if > they believed there ?be no effective difference between a Trump presidency > and a Clinton presidency. But if they believed that then they wouldn't be > rational. Johnson has no chance of becoming president, but he does have a > chance of being a factor in determining who will be the next one, and it is > VASTLY more important to avoid a apocalyptic president than it is to elect > a good one. If he wins then for the next 4 years your personal survival > will be a function of the intelligence, knowledge, and emotional stability > of Donald Trump. Are you comfortable with that? Imagine what would have > happened if Trump was president in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crises > instead of Kennedy! > > John K Clark > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 16:46:09 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 09:46:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 9:38 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump's lies On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael LaTorra > wrote: ?> ? With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for Gary Johnson. ?The only way a rational person could vote for Gary Johnson would be if they believed there ?be no effective difference between a Trump presidency and a Clinton presidency. But if they believed that then they wouldn't be rational? John K Clark John, on this we find rare agreement: we agree there is a difference between those two. One is crazy, the other is corrupt. Nearly every day brings fresh waves of evidence on both. Those waves of evidence are not expected to stop crashing against the seawall of sanity and honesty in government. Don?t surrender before the first arrow flies. Don?t give up on your own country. Don?t hand it over, stand tall, do all you can, never give up. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 18:01:16 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:01:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 24, 2016 9:51 AM, "Dave Sill" wrote: > Give it a rest, John. You're not convincing anyone and you're annoying and offending at least me, almost certainly others. And me. Sufficient rational reasons have been given why someone who doesn't want Trump as president but would settle for Clinton might vote for Johnson. Either refute them or accept that your logic has been disproven. (Or show that you are uninterested in debate and should be banned, but hopefully that is nor the case.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 17:04:40 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:04:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: I would agree. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, and the repeated rants strike me as very irrational. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > Give it a rest, John. You're not convincing anyone and you're annoying and > offending at least me, almost certainly others. > > -Dave > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:38 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael LaTorra >> wrote: >> >> ?> ? >>> With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for >>> Gary Johnson. >>> >> >> ?The only way a rational person could vote for Gary Johnson would be if >> they believed there ?be no effective difference between a Trump presidency >> and a Clinton presidency. But if they believed that then they wouldn't be >> rational. Johnson has no chance of becoming president, but he does have a >> chance of being a factor in determining who will be the next one, and it is >> VASTLY more important to avoid a apocalyptic president than it is to elect >> a good one. If he wins then for the next 4 years your personal survival >> will be a function of the intelligence, knowledge, and emotional stability >> of Donald Trump. Are you comfortable with that? Imagine what would have >> happened if Trump was president in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crises >> instead of Kennedy! >> >> John K Clark >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 18:42:51 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:42:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] tabby's star again Message-ID: <008101d1fe37$5213a2d0$f63ae870$@att.net> There was an excellent talk hosted by SETI over at the Microsloth campus last week. Now, a good new article on the latest on Tabby's star: http://www.space.com/33813-alien-megastructure-mystery-tabbys-star.html This SETI talk went over all the known natural explanations for Tabby's dimming, and why none of them work very well. Then (being the SETI crowd) he indulged us with the models involving a Dyson Swarm, indicating that the IR signature doesn't match that model either. I had to run to pick up my son at school, so I didn't get a chance to point out that if the Dyson Swarm needed to reflect most of the energy from the star in a low-entropy state (and thus not use the energy for computing) for some very good reason (such as: it would otherwise overheat inboard in accordance with my understanding of how Bessel functions explain the thermal gradient in a planet.) If there is a physical limitation requiring this low-entropy heat rejection, if that phenomenon is fundamental and real (and I wasn't just misunderstanding my thermal model (which is entirely possible)) then an alien technological megastructure would be the only proposed explanation for Tabby's dimming spectrum we cannot directly counter-indicate or disprove. Keeeewwwaaaalllllll. {8-] Have we any currently active (preferably with industry or academic contacts) thermal science hipsters? We should work on this. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 19:07:21 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:07:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 24, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Dylan Distasio wrote: > I would agree. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, and the repeated rants strike me as very irrational. Fear drives some to such. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 19:02:55 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:02:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00a201d1fe3a$1faa2e60$5efe8b20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 11:01 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump's lies On Aug 24, 2016 9:51 AM, "Dave Sill" > wrote: > Give it a rest, John. You're not convincing anyone and you're annoying and offending at least me, almost certainly others. And me. Sufficient rational reasons have been given why someone who doesn't want Trump as president but would settle for Clinton might vote for Johnson. Either refute them or accept that your logic has been disproven. (Or show that you are uninterested in debate and should be banned, but hopefully that is nor the case.) The reason why I have hesitated to ban this discussion and even participated in the whole distasteful affair myself, and the reason why I beg our non-yank readers to bear with us patiently please: -->This is a goddam scary time for Americans.<---- It is even more scary for those of us who have worked in or around the US military, who have worked in or around military technology companies, who know how badly this can turn out. Ja, it is relevant to us and I would think to anyone who shares the planet. Your friendly neighborhood omnipotent but modest and power-eschewing ExI moderator, spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 19:28:12 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:28:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:46 PM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > there is a difference between those two. One is crazy, the other is > corrupt. > > ?If so then a rations person would pick President Corrupt ?to? control of thousands of H-bombs not President Crazy. And Trump is crazy AND corrupt. If Trump is elected he says he will NOT put his riches into a blind trust as is traditional, instead he will give control of his financial empire to his wife and kids. Do you see any sort of conflict of interest there? If Hillary wins Bill says he will leave the foundation, stop fundraising for it, and the foundation will no longer accept foreign or corporate donations. > ?> ? > Nearly every day brings fresh waves of evidence on both. ?Evidence of Trump's madness yes, but exactly what has Clinton done that is so corrupt? All I see is vague hand waving about evil yoga and vast personal enrichment that was somehow illegal (despite the fact that all of Hillary's ?' tax returns ?are online for all to see going all the way back to 1977) and even more nebulous conspiracy theories involving the Clinton Foundation (despite the fact that the Clinton Foundation ? tax records are online too as well as a complete outside audit. ? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 19:42:26 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:42:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Dave Sill wrote: ?> ? > Give it a rest, John. > ?No.? > ?> ? > You're not convincing anyone ?I freely admit it's pointless to try to convince a irrational person, but not everyone has that affliction. ? ?> ? and you're annoying and offending at least me ?I'm sorry if you find reality distressing, ? ?but being annoyed and offended can not harm you; however an H-bomb can. John K Clark > almost certainly others. > > -Dave > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:38 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael LaTorra >> wrote: >> >> ?> ? >>> With those odds from FiveThiryEight, I feel very comfortable voting for >>> Gary Johnson. >>> >> >> ?The only way a rational person could vote for Gary Johnson would be if >> they believed there ?be no effective difference between a Trump presidency >> and a Clinton presidency. But if they believed that then they wouldn't be >> rational. Johnson has no chance of becoming president, but he does have a >> chance of being a factor in determining who will be the next one, and it is >> VASTLY more important to avoid a apocalyptic president than it is to elect >> a good one. If he wins then for the next 4 years your personal survival >> will be a function of the intelligence, knowledge, and emotional stability >> of Donald Trump. Are you comfortable with that? Imagine what would have >> happened if Trump was president in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crises >> instead of Kennedy! >> >> John K Clark >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 19:48:36 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:48:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 Dylan Distasio wrote: > ?> ? > I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here > ?You're not??!!? ? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 19:59:12 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:59:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] tabby's star again Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:42 AM, spike wrote: snip > Have we any currently active (preferably with industry or academic contacts) > thermal science hipsters? We should work on this. Thermal problems are the bane of EEs world over. I spent a good fraction of my professional time concerned with heat problems. Waste heat rejection from power satellites is a big piece of what I work on now. With regard to Tabby's star, there is a thermal power satellite design that directionally radiates waste heat solar north and south. The sunshade that keeps local light off the radiator tubes prevents IR radiation in the plane of the ecliptic. So there is at least on class of alien megastructure which would not show excess IR from blocked light. Keith From lubkin at unreasonable.com Wed Aug 24 20:05:34 2016 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:05:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] English corpora In-Reply-To: References: <201608241429.u7OETi5o002496@ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201608242005.u7OK5r37014628@ziaspace.com> Keith wrote: >It's possible you can do this with Moby Lexicon, but I really don't >know. I know the guy who compiled the list if you want a pointer to >him. That does the trick. Parts of speech for 230,000 dictionary entries, in an easy-to-process format. http://icon.shef.ac.uk/Moby/ Thanks. -- David. From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 20:07:44 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:07:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 24, 2016 12:43 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > ?I'm sorry if you find reality distressing, ? You, not us, are the one denying reality at this point. Not about the undesirability of a Trump presidency (on which we agree), but about all the other factors affecting our votes that we have repeatedly pointed out to you. But one more time: It is, in fact, rationally possible to not want Trump in office and at the same time vote for Johnson. This is especially the case in non-swing states, where the electors are practically already pledged to Clinton (or ones where they are practically already pledged to Trump), so one's vote can not affect that but can, if cast for Johnson, at least signal disaffection with both major parties. In these states, voting for Johnson does not affect the outcome, and thus neither increases nor decreases the likelihood of a Trump presidency (nor of a Clinton presidency). Do you understand this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 20:10:37 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:10:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] gary's wisdom, was: RE: jill's folly, was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> References: <00d101d1fdb7$66fc7a80$34f56f80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:27 PM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > This is the man that is an order of magnitude closer to my thinking than > any of the others: > > > > > ? ? > http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm > > > > ? ? > I took those ISideWith quizzes and Johnson came out by far the closest > ? ? > match to my views every time regardless of which areas I chose to detail: > > > > https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz > ?I took the quiz too and like you it said I should vote for Johnson, but I think that's only because one of the questions wasn't "Should a madman be president?", if it was on the test I would has said "no", and I would rate that question as most important. In fact all the other issues seem rather trivial in comparison. John ?K Clark > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 20:34:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:34:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > ?> ? > the undesirability of a Trump presidency (on which we agree) > > ?Undesirable is a massive understatement, it would be a catastrophe, and not just for the USA but for the entire world. ? > ?> ? > It is, in fact, rationally possible to not want Trump in office and at the > same time vote for Johnson. This is especially the case in non-swing > states, So a rational Johnson voter is quite literally staking his life on the validity of polls that are usually pretty good but not always. Do you really want to do that? I said it before I'll say it again, it's far more important to avoid a disastrous president than elect a good one, and Donald Trump scares me to death like no politician in my lifetime. John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 20:03:37 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:03:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: I appreciate that you feel like there is a high probability of global catastrophe and death if Trump wins, and that you need to scream it from the roof tops in an attempt to save us all. Not every "rational" person has come to the same conclusion you have when running the probabilities. I seriously doubt that you have convinced one person here to change their upcoming voter behavior based on your continued postings on the topic. That's what I mean by I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. You must know the odds are very low of you getting someone to switch their political loyalties. I'm generally a lurker here and enjoy the extropy discussions with the intent of one day contributing meaningfully to them. I think these types of threads accomplish nothing beyond increasing acrimony amongst list members who may not agree with your conclusions. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:48 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 Dylan Distasio wrote: > > >> ?> ? >> I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here >> > > ?You're not??!!? > > ? > > John K Clark > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 20:52:44 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:52:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> Message-ID: <018b01d1fe49$772e5d50$658b17f0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump's lies On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:46 PM, spike > wrote: ? >?If so then a rations person would pick President Corrupt ?? but exactly what has Clinton done that is so corrupt? ? John K Clark Well, let?s see, there are so many scandals now, I need a rolodex to even keep track of them. Apparently communications have leaked showing Huma Abedin was working with Dennis Cheng on Clinton Foundation business. He is being accused of supplying Clinton Foundation donor information with Abedin, making it perfectly clear to the Foundation supporters what they were getting for their ?donations.? The investigations are now racketeering related rather than merely compromising national security. We knew it was happening already, but the leaked memos are proof: Clinton was selling access, and funneling the profit through her ?non-profit? organization. Mysteriously, Clinton seemed eager to erase the evidence which would have exonerated her. Nixon did that too a long time ago. That vast right-wing conspiracy, the FBI, is very interested in these latest findings. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 20:56:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:56:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] tabby's star again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <019701d1fe49$ef2dd100$cd897300$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Keith Henson ... >...With regard to Tabby's star, there is a thermal power satellite design that directionally radiates waste heat solar north and south. The sunshade that keeps local light off the radiator tubes prevents IR radiation in the plane of the ecliptic. So there is at least on class of alien megastructure which would not show excess IR from blocked light. Keith JA! Now what I really want is for some real Bessel function hipster to work with me. I took an approach I haven't seen before with regard to applying that mathematical magic trick in this setting. Math geeks, especially ones with access to hip grad students please? spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 22:36:53 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:36:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <018b01d1fe49$772e5d50$658b17f0$@att.net> References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> <018b01d1fe49$772e5d50$658b17f0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:52 PM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > Apparently communications have leaked showing Huma Abedin was working with > Dennis Cheng on Clinton Foundation business. > > Dennis Cheng ? once worked for the Clinton Foundation ?but resigned and now is employed by the Clinton campaign. What's illegal or immoral in that? Huma Abedin ? once worked for the State Department but resigned and now works for the Clinton campaign. ? What's illegal or immoral in that? ?Every presidential candidate picks people they know and have worked with before to run their campaign, and Clinton knows people in both the foundation and the State Department. ? ? What's illegal or immoral in that > ?> ? > He is being accused of supplying Clinton Foundation donor information with > Abedin, > > ? What's illegal or immoral in that? It's not secret, if somebody want ?s? the Clinton Foundation donor information ?there is no need to go through any cloak and dagger nonsense, they can just ask somebody that works there, or even easier just Google it.? > ?> ? > making it perfectly clear to the Foundation supporters what they were > getting for their ?donations.? > > Both Bill ?Gates? and Warren Buffett have donated to the Clinton foundation because they thought it was doing good work and ?was ? saving lives, and I don't think either one of those men are fools ? or crooks? . Do you? > ?> ? > Clinton was selling access, > ? > and funneling the profit through her ?non-profit? organization. > > ?There is not a speck of evidence that the Clinton Foundation isn't exactly what it says it is, a non-profit organization. And there is not a speck of evidence that any money meant for the foundation was funneled into ?Hillary's personal bank account, and Hillary has put her tax returns online for all to see from 1977 to today. Trump has not. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Aug 24 23:10:16 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:10:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access Message-ID: <77E8AE62-5EEB-4E3B-A251-348E0D2AFE3F@gmail.com> http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/23/the-clinton-foundation-was-clearly-an-av Some believe there's nothing to see here. And surely this is how politics works and has worked for as long as any of us have been around. Yet this is something that would be viewed as immoral and corrupt by _conventional_ moral standards. (Whether it's illegal, of course, depends on the particular legal framework. If the best one can argue is that something was legal, well, one needn't be reminded that what's legal depends on the whims of the legislature and of judges.) Now, that said, one can still argue that a corrupt Clinton would be better than the alternatives, but please let's not pretend Clinton isn't corrupt simply because of fear her adversary might win. That would be _irrational_ in the epistemic sense. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 24 23:37:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:37:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> <018b01d1fe49$772e5d50$658b17f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <026301d1fe60$708f9ab0$51aed010$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >? Huma Abedin once worked for the State Department but resigned and now works for the Clinton campaign. ?What's illegal or immoral in that? ?John K. Clark The exchange between Dennis Cheng and Huma Abedin regarding Clinton Foundation donors was written on 11 June 2012. Huma Abedin was at that moment employed as a high level State Department employee, Clinton?s personal assistant. This is conflict of interest. The evidence Mr. Nix? er? Mrs Clinton needs to prove her innocence was apparently wiped away accidentally with the yoga and wedding plans. This appears to be pay to play, racketeering, RICO stuff. Access to the State Department in exchange for donations. When Clinton erased that yoga, she took on herself the burden of proof of her innocence. That burden is getting heavier every day. I hear the approaching footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 01:57:19 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:57:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:34 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > >> ?> ? >> It is, in fact, rationally possible to not want Trump in office and at >> the same time vote for Johnson. This is especially the case in non-swing >> states, > > > So a rational Johnson voter is quite literally staking his life on the > validity of polls that are usually pretty good but not always. > That is not the only factor, and you insult us by continuing to claim that it is after the others have been repeatedly pointed out to you. Among the other factors: * Historical outcomes of state votes. * The number of polls all saying the same thing. * The margin of error: two-sigma error is much less than half as likely as one-sigma, and the margin in many states is over two-sigma. * The likelihood of enough voters changing to even make the state remotely competitive, let alone actually change who the electors go for. All these add (multiply, really) up to a far lesser chance of the vote for Johnson not changing the non-battleground states than, say, your odds of getting in an automobile accident, even multiplying by the far larger damage a Trump presidency would incur. (Your typical style so far would be to snip around that final comma, and go ballistic about how a Trump presidency is far worse than an automobile accident. I only expect you to not do that because I am explicitly calling you out on such unproductive tactics: I have already acknowledged the point you would go ballistic about, so going into hysterics about it only turns people away from listening to you and thereby makes a Trump presidency ever so slightly incrementally more likely.) Which is to say: when you actually calculate the odds, no, for most voters there is practically no chance of changing their state's electors, certainly not with their own vote. Not "small but considering the damage Trump would do a Clinton vote is mandated", but "so small that even considering the damage Trump would do does not mandate a Clinton vote". Now, battleground states where individual votes might make a difference? Sure, vote for Clinton there. The majority of American voters do not live in such states. Besides, if you really want to make a difference, getting a job with the vote counting machine people so as to have a remote chance of "correcting" the vote, or finding out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely and preparing to actually do so, has a far greater chance of changing at least one elector. (Texas may be a tempting target, but solid-red states such as Wyoming or Oklahoma may be easier, and every elector helps. Louisiana might be one of the easiest targets.) Which brings up the question: why are you asking us to do something, when you yourself are not being as effective as you can on what you claim is the most urgent issue? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 02:19:36 2016 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:19:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Microsoft, was: tabby's star again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Aug 24, 2016 2:57 PM, "spike" wrote: > > There was an excellent talk hosted by SETI over at the Microsloth campus last week. Now, a good new article on the latest on Tabby?s star: Every time I read your "Microsloth" jab it makes me cringe. That company did a lot to make computers everyday items. Can you imagine an alternate world where Microsoft never existed? Maybe something else would have filled the role and history would read almost identically. Maybe "computers" would still be enormous machines operated by specialist trained in their arcane art. Do you think the Internet would be anything like we have today if the only inhabitants were the old stereotype of basement-dwelling nerds? idk, i feel like Microsoft deserves at least some respect for directly and indirectly contributing to the world we mostly take for granted today. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 02:33:10 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:33:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <026301d1fe60$708f9ab0$51aed010$@att.net> References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> <006201d1fe27$0498afb0$0dca0f10$@att.net> <018b01d1fe49$772e5d50$658b17f0$@att.net> <026301d1fe60$708f9ab0$51aed010$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:37 PM, spike wrote: > > ?> ? > The exchange between Dennis Cheng and Huma Abedin regarding Clinton > Foundation donors was written on 11 June 2012. Huma Abedin was at that > moment employed as a high level State Department employee, Clinton?s > personal assistant. ?Somebody at the State Department ?talked with somebody at a philanthropic foundation. What's illegal or immoral about that? ?> ? > This is conflict of interest. ?What interest does the State Department have that is in conflict with what the Clinton Foundation wants? Exactly what preferential treatment did ? ?the Clinton Foundation get from State Department? > ?> ? > Mrs Clinton needs to prove her innocence > > ?You have no evidence of ? ?guilt but you demand she prove her innocence, and even worse you can't even say exactly (or even approximately) what the crime is that she needs to prove her innocent of. Look Spike I don't think? Hillary ?is the greatest person in the world either, she only looks great when compared with Trump, but neither Bill nor Hillary have ever drawn a salary from the foundation or made any money off it in any other way. Demonizing the Clinton Foundation as some sort of sinister crime organization is just silly. ? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 02:44:12 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:44:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: ?> >>> ?>>? >>> ? >>> It is, in fact, rationally possible to not want Trump in office and at >>> the same time vote for Johnson. This is especially the case in non-swing >>> states, >> >> >> ?>> ? >> So a rational Johnson voter is quite literally staking his life on the >> validity of polls that are usually pretty good but not always. >> > > ?> ? > That is not the only factor, and you insult us by continuing to claim that > it is > Adrian ? I'll just say this, if Trump wins and you survive the ensuing carnage you will not look back on your Johnson vote with pride.? John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 02:55:47 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 19:55:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:44 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > ?> >>>> ?>>? >>>> ? >>>> It is, in fact, rationally possible to not want Trump in office and at >>>> the same time vote for Johnson. This is especially the case in non-swing >>>> states, >>> >>> >>> ?>> ? >>> So a rational Johnson voter is quite literally staking his life on the >>> validity of polls that are usually pretty good but not always. >>> >> >> ?> ? >> That is not the only factor, and you insult us by continuing to claim >> that it is >> > > Adrian > ? I'll just say this, if Trump wins and you survive the ensuing carnage > you will not look back on your Johnson vote with pride.? > I notice you neatly ignored the rest of my post, including asking why you aren't dedicating everything you have to more effective actions to stop Trump, since you clearly believe in his threat. So why aren't you? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 25 03:16:39 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 20:16:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] geek yell Message-ID: <008b01d1fe7f$18dfd900$4a9f8b00$@att.net> I don?t know who else to ask: My son?s scout friends want to form the Geek Patrol. Now they need a geek yell. Suggestions? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at kurzweilai.net Thu Aug 25 03:56:11 2016 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (AMARA D ANGELICA) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 23:56:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] geek yell In-Reply-To: <008b01d1fe7f$18dfd900$4a9f8b00$@att.net> References: <008b01d1fe7f$18dfd900$4a9f8b00$@att.net> Message-ID: <2FFDEEF5-C559-460D-9BD0-3C322597736D@kurzweilai.net> USB! USB! > On Aug 24, 2016, at 11:16 PM, spike wrote: > > > I don?t know who else to ask: > > My son?s scout friends want to form the Geek Patrol. Now they need a geek yell. Suggestions? > > spike > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 04:57:43 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:57:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] geek yell In-Reply-To: <008b01d1fe7f$18dfd900$4a9f8b00$@att.net> References: <008b01d1fe7f$18dfd900$4a9f8b00$@att.net> Message-ID: YAGP! As in, "Yet Another Geek Patrol". https://www.google.com/#q=%22geek+patrol%22 ;) On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:16 PM, spike wrote: > > > I don?t know who else to ask: > > > > My son?s scout friends want to form the Geek Patrol. Now they need a geek > yell. Suggestions? > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cryptaxe at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 02:22:25 2016 From: cryptaxe at gmail.com (CryptAxe) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 19:22:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access In-Reply-To: <77E8AE62-5EEB-4E3B-A251-348E0D2AFE3F@gmail.com> References: <77E8AE62-5EEB-4E3B-A251-348E0D2AFE3F@gmail.com> Message-ID: I've actually been somewhat surprised by the anti Trump sentiment within this mailing list. I essentially "threw my vote away" by voting for Gary Johnson. I think I would pick Trump over Hilary though. Trump seems easier to predict. While obviously motivated by human things like greed, his flamboyant attitude I think makes it hard him to conceal his true thoughts. You might not agree with his thoughts, and I'm not politically savvy so maybe that's actually a bad thing. What do you adamant anti Trump extropians think? On Aug 24, 2016 4:11 PM, "Dan TheBookMan" wrote: > http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/23/the-clinton-foundation-was-clearly-an-av > > Some believe there's nothing to see here. And surely this is how politics > works and has worked for as long as any of us have been around. Yet this is > something that would be viewed as immoral and corrupt by _conventional_ > moral standards. (Whether it's illegal, of course, depends on the > particular legal framework. If the best one can argue is that something was > legal, well, one needn't be reminded that what's legal depends on the whims > of the legislature and of judges.) > > Now, that said, one can still argue that a corrupt Clinton would be better > than the alternatives, but please let's not pretend Clinton isn't corrupt > simply because of fear her adversary might win. That would be _irrational_ > in the epistemic sense. > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 06:01:17 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 23:01:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access In-Reply-To: References: <77E8AE62-5EEB-4E3B-A251-348E0D2AFE3F@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:22 PM, CryptAxe wrote: > I've actually been somewhat surprised by the anti Trump sentiment within > this mailing list. I essentially "threw my vote away" by voting for Gary > Johnson. I think I would pick Trump over Hilary though. > I'll make you the same offer I make anyone else in your position. You vote for Johnson instead of Trump, and I'll vote for Johnson instead of Clinton. > Trump seems easier to predict. While obviously motivated by human things > like greed, his flamboyant attitude I think makes it hard him to conceal > his true thoughts. You might not agree with his thoughts, and I'm not > politically savvy so maybe that's actually a bad thing. > > What do you adamant anti Trump extropians think? > "Easier to predict" does not, by itself, a better executive make. Even a complete inability to lie would not suffice, although Trump has demonstrated so much ability to lie that it is no longer newsworthy (unlike his opponent). Let there be no mistake. He is intent on a course that would result in the slaughter of many innocent lives, and unnecessarily degraded conditions for many more. (Perhaps Clinton is too, but far less lives in her case. It has been said that the choice between them is a "lesser of two evils" thing.) The best executives are expected to be above the most primitive of human instincts, and to think before acting. Watch how Obama governs. Notice how he deals with anger - it's not that he doesn't feel it, not that he doesn't get passionate about issues, but he doesn't lash out at the first target to come to mind. When he does direct the forces at his command - military, economic, political, or otherwise - to strike at someone or some organization, there is little question that they are they ones who have incurred his wrath, and at least some effort to limit collateral damage. Trump, by contrast, has said he would e.g. kick out all Muslims. He would find it easiest to start with the most loyal ones, such as the ones in our military, who trusted America enough to identify themselves as Muslim. What he would fail to do is actually find any would-be terrorists with enough sense that they might actually be dangerous (and thus, you know, not identify as Muslim). This is obvious to anyone taking but a few moments to think through the consequences of his proposals. One of these men upholds law, order, and justice as they have been practiced in America for centuries. The other claims he would promote law and order, but has demonstrated he would do the exact opposite, and might not understand what "rule of law" truly is. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 25 06:07:12 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 23:07:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] pay to play, was: RE: Trump's lies Message-ID: <00fd01d1fe96$ec19d340$c44d79c0$@att.net> I have been requested to suggest strict subject line discipline for those who wish to indulge in US politics. Propose we write subject lines such that anyone who wants to spare themselves the feelings of hopeless despair many of us have experienced in the past several months can easily recognize the post as political content, thanks. s From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark > >?Exactly what preferential treatment did ?the Clinton Foundation get from State Department? >?We won?t know that until the FBI can recover the rest of that yoga, or the Russians show up with it in December. What do we do then? What if they show up with it in January? ?> >?Mrs Clinton needs to prove her innocence ?>?You have no evidence of ?guilt but you demand she prove her innocence?John K Clark Mrs. Clinton put government property on her private server which is illegal. When she did that, everything on that server is subject to subpoena. When Judicial Watch finally got that subpoena, Mrs. Clinton said ??the server will remain private?? instead of handing over the whole thing right then, right there. That told us everything we needed to know: she has something to hide. What was it? Perhaps a copy of the contract explaining why Huma Abedin was being paid the salary of a Brigadier General with the qualifications of a Lieutenant? Civil service is very strict on that; such things must be carefully documented. I want to see where someone wrote in a contract where it was Huma?s job to arrange meetings with the State Department for wealthy Clinton Foundation donors hoping to buy access. If that isn?t in a signed contract, why do you suppose she was being paid all that money? What is in her contract? Where is that contract? How did they review, verify or audit that contract? When? Who signed off on it? Abedin and Clinton were civil servants, they had rules to follow. They broke them. As the process was explained to me when I took the contracting course, if they can?t produce documentation or verification of that employment arrangement, Abedin faces disbarment from any government job and Clinton faces 1 to 5 in Club Fed As soon as Clinton started erasing the evidence, some of which was State Department related, she is destroying US government property, which is illegal. Ja, she now has taken on herself the burden of proving her innocence, and that is pretty hard to do when that proof was the entire contents of that server, which she attempted to partially erase. Imagine that: she attempted to destroy the evidence needed to prove her own innocence. I am beginning to suspect that Nixon might have had something other than yoga on his 18 minutes of missing audio as well. John we are in for a rough ride, my fellow American. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 25 06:17:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 23:17:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access In-Reply-To: References: <77E8AE62-5EEB-4E3B-A251-348E0D2AFE3F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <010301d1fe98$5576fb00$0064f100$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of CryptAxe Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 7:22 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access >?I've actually been somewhat surprised by the anti Trump sentiment within this mailing list. I essentially "threw my vote away" by voting for Gary Johnson. I think I would pick Trump over Hilary though? I will make a prediction: either Clinton or Trump will find the job of president most unsatisfying. Both seem to be motivated by power, and both may be surprised at how little power they have in that office. Reasoning: a CEO can do pretty much whatever the hell he or she wants if he or she owns the company. Perfect place for a power-addicted demagogue. But in the US presidency, he or she is watched constantly and congress will check the power of that office. Regardless of how it comes out, I can imagine the probability of a successful impeachment in the next term as high. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 13:17:14 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:17:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Microsoft, was: tabby's star again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: idk, i feel like Microsoft deserves at least some respect for directly and > indirectly contributing to the world we mostly take for granted today. > Microsoft was in it for the money and was hugely successful at that, and they had a few innovations along the way, but most people in computer science and IT think they squandered many opportunities to really improve desktop computing. In a world without MS, someone else would have filled the void. Apple wasn't far behind. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 14:28:37 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:28:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: ?> ? > I notice you neatly ignored the rest of my post, > ?That's right I did. Does your suggestion that I get a job at an election machine company and " find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely ?" and then ? commit a felony and rig the presidential election really deserve further comment? John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 14:43:21 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:43:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:28 AM, John Clark wrote: > > find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely > ?" and then ? > commit a felony and rig the presidential election really deserve further > comment? > Not necessarily, but if you really think electing Trump will be a disaster, committing a felony to prevent it shouldn't stop you. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 25 14:42:12 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 07:42:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting machines again was: RE: Trump's lies Message-ID: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> >?] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Trump's lies On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Tymes > wrote: >? Does your suggestion that I get a job at an election machine company and " find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely ?" and then ?commit a felony and rig the presidential election really deserve further comment? John K Clark ? Too late, it?s already been done: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0qivPudp6U Any state still using paperless voting machines will also have a system in place which somehow defeats any efforts to compare their mail-in ballot results to their paper ballot results to their machine ballot results. No point in having that: what happens if the results disagree? Then what? You will find all those states will go to whichever candidate assures us that machine voting is legitimate, perfectly safe, no need for any kind of verification, etc, no fire in all this smoke. The comments by those who know is that not only are electronic voting machines hackable, it isn?t even difficult to do it. Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by criminals? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diego.saravia at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:00:20 2016 From: diego.saravia at gmail.com (Diego Saravia) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 12:00:20 -0300 Subject: [ExI] voting machines again was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> References: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> Message-ID: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacking_Democracy 2016-08-25 11:42 GMT-03:00 spike : > > > > > *>?*] *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Trump's lies > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > >? Does your suggestion that I get a job at an election machine company > and " > > find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely > > ?" and then ?commit a felony and rig the presidential election really > deserve further comment? John K Clark ? > > > > > > > > Too late, it?s already been done: > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0qivPudp6U > > > > Any state still using paperless voting machines will also have a system in > place which somehow defeats any efforts to compare their mail-in ballot > results to their paper ballot results to their machine ballot results. No > point in having that: what happens if the results disagree? Then what? > You will find all those states will go to whichever candidate assures us > that machine voting is legitimate, perfectly safe, no need for any kind of > verification, etc, no fire in all this smoke. > > > > The comments by those who know is that not only are electronic voting > machines hackable, it isn?t even difficult to do it. > > > > Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by > criminals? > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- Diego Saravia Diego.Saravia at gmail.com NO FUNCIONA->dsa at unsa.edu.ar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:01:31 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:01:31 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Microsoft, was: tabby's star again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In a world without MS, someone else would have filled the void. Apple wasn't far behind. -Dave ?I think Apple was ahead on usability by nongeeks and maybe still is. But MS had the marketing geniuses before Apple got theirs. bill w? On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > idk, i feel like Microsoft deserves at least some respect for directly and >> indirectly contributing to the world we mostly take for granted today. >> > > Microsoft was in it for the money and was hugely successful at that, and > they had a few innovations along the way, but most people in computer > science and IT think they squandered many opportunities to really improve > desktop computing. > > In a world without MS, someone else would have filled the void. Apple > wasn't far behind. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:04:08 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:04:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] voting machines again was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> References: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> Message-ID: Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by criminals? spike Do you mean the criminals in the Republican or Democratic party? ):) bill w (right - I do not know how to do an icon - I tried for evil smile) On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:42 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?*] *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Trump's lies > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > >? Does your suggestion that I get a job at an election machine company > and " > > find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely > > ?" and then ?commit a felony and rig the presidential election really > deserve further comment? John K Clark ? > > > > > > > > Too late, it?s already been done: > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0qivPudp6U > > > > Any state still using paperless voting machines will also have a system in > place which somehow defeats any efforts to compare their mail-in ballot > results to their paper ballot results to their machine ballot results. No > point in having that: what happens if the results disagree? Then what? > You will find all those states will go to whichever candidate assures us > that machine voting is legitimate, perfectly safe, no need for any kind of > verification, etc, no fire in all this smoke. > > > > The comments by those who know is that not only are electronic voting > machines hackable, it isn?t even difficult to do it. > > > > Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by > criminals? > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:05:27 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:05:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting machines again In-Reply-To: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> References: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> Message-ID: <7AC777DA-EE85-47E3-ABA6-6D9A280A8FD7@gmail.com> On Aug 25, 2016, at 7:42 AM, spike wrote: > The comments by those who know is that not only are electronic voting machines hackable, it isn?t even difficult to do it. > > Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by criminals? As if criminals are united behind one of the two major parties... :/ Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:06:47 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:06:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again Message-ID: Regardless of how this election turns out, I think we mostly understand the reason for the rise of crazy in politics in the US. It's fundamentally rooted in the falling expectations of a large fraction of the population. http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12552602/breitbart-trump-explained Things like this simply would not have happened when the future was looking good. I.e., if we want less crazy in US politics, it take fixing the economic outlook for a large segment of the population. Best wishes, Keith From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:18:14 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:18:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Trump's lies In-Reply-To: References: <001401d1fda7$80065740$801305c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 25, 2016 7:30 AM, "John Clark" wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> I notice you neatly ignored the rest of my post, > > ?That's right I did. Does your suggestion that I get a job at an election machine company and " > find out how to hack the vote counting machines remotely > ?" and then ? > commit a felony and rig the presidential election really deserve further comment? Given the stridency and urgency with which you declare that a Trump presidency would be so disastrous for the human race? Yes, it does. A mere felony is nothing in the face of survival of the human race - which you have repeatedly said Trump would risk. Or is the danger not in fact as extreme as you say? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:22:22 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:22:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: .e., if we want less crazy in US politics, it take fixing the economic outlook for a large segment of the population. keith You are likely right. But the irony is that about 95% of the world's population would love to be here, even in the lower classes. Someone said that this is the first generation in a long time where the kids will not be better off than the parents. Did you get all you wanted out of the irrational discussion? bill w On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > Regardless of how this election turns out, I think we mostly > understand the reason for the rise of crazy in politics in the US. > It's fundamentally rooted in the falling expectations of a large > fraction of the population. > > http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12552602/breitbart-trump-explained > > Things like this simply would not have happened when the future was > looking good. > > I.e., if we want less crazy in US politics, it take fixing the > economic outlook for a large segment of the population. > > Best wishes, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:25:02 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:25:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 25 August 2016 at 16:06, Keith Henson wrote: > Regardless of how this election turns out, I think we mostly > understand the reason for the rise of crazy in politics in the US. > It's fundamentally rooted in the falling expectations of a large > fraction of the population. > > http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12552602/breitbart-trump-explained > > Things like this simply would not have happened when the future was > looking good. > > I.e., if we want less crazy in US politics, it take fixing the > economic outlook for a large segment of the population. > Agreed. That is the ideal of government for the people. Not government for bankers and corporations. The growing inequality in the US is not going to change direction easily. BillK From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:27:42 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:27:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting machines again was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> References: <00d801d1fede$de3c65b0$9ab53110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Aug 25, 2016 7:56 AM, "spike" wrote: > Hacking a voting machine is a crime. Which party would be favored by criminals? Depends on the criminal. They vote too (unless and until caught). Also, just because they would commit this crime does not mean they would commit most others (neighborhoods hosting mob bosses tend to be notoriously free of petty "street" crimes). Honestly, I can see people hacking the vote for Trump, for Clinton, and for Johnson...and possibly even a three way hacking battle in at least one state, with most of that state's government sincerely unaware the vote is anything but legit. (Maybe more, if one side has two or more groups not in contact with each other, and/or if another party is favored by a group just trying to prove that state's vote was hacked.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:30:24 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 11:30:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] pay to play, was: RE: Trump's lies In-Reply-To: <00fd01d1fe96$ec19d340$c44d79c0$@att.net> References: <00fd01d1fe96$ec19d340$c44d79c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 2:07 AM, spike wrote: > ?> ? > Mrs. Clinton put government property on her private server which is > illegal. > George W Bush's ? ? Deputy Attorney General ? ? and current *REPUBLICAN? *head of the FBI ? didn't think it was illegal, so why should I?? > ?> ? > it was Huma?s job to arrange meetings with the State Department for > wealthy Clinton Foundation donors hoping to buy access. > > ?I don't understand this horror of buying access, if that were illegal every member of the House Of Representatives, every member of the Senate, every state governor, and the President and Vice President would all be in jail. Donald Trump would be in jail too, he's bragged that he gave money to candidates so that later if he wants to talk to one of them they will take his call. And this is money given to help, not a philanthropic foundation that has saved many lives, but to help nobody but the candidate himself. While Secretary Of State if Hillary knew somebody had given a lot of money to the foundation (not to her!) did she advance them a few places in the long line to shake her hand for 5 seconds and have their picture taken together so the donner could put it on his office wall? Sure. Did any of the money donated end up in Hilary's pockets? No. Did the State Department make any decision that benefited the donner because of the donation? No. > ?> ? > she now has taken on herself the burden of proving her innocence, > > ? You don't ? ? care that there is no evidence she's guilty, and ? you don't just ? demand she prove her innocence of *a* crime, you demand she prove that she didn't perform any action that the laws of physics allow but the laws of the USA do not. You demand she prove she's innocent of every one ? ? of an infinite number of potential crimes! > ?> ? > and that is pretty hard to do > > ?Yes, that would be pretty hard to do. > ?> ? > John we are in for a rough ride, my fellow American. > > ?There is a 24.9% chance that what you say will turn out to be true. And it won't be a rough ride just for America but for the entire world.? John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:37:11 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:37:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 25 August 2016 at 16:22, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > You are likely right. But the irony is that about 95% of the world's > population would love to be here, even in the lower classes. Someone said > that this is the first generation in a long time where the kids will not be > better off than the parents. > > Did you get all you wanted out of the irrational discussion? > Hey! Pay attention at the back! :) You're a psychologist. You know it's all relative. If you give a group of people 100 USD each, they go away very happy. But if you tell them that group B got 500 USD each, they promptly become unhappy, jealous and feel unfairly treated. It shouldn't make any difference. They still have their 100 USD each, but humans aren't wired like that. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:48:09 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:48:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hey! Pay attention at the back! :) You're a psychologist. You know it's all relative. If you give a group of people 100 USD each, they go away very happy. But if you tell them that group B got 500 USD each, they promptly become unhappy, jealous and feel unfairly treated. It shouldn't make any difference. They still have their 100 USD each, but humans aren't wired like that. bill k Yeah, you're right. But I have to restrain myself from giving a minilecture with all relevant term every time I explain something. Problem for old profs - just let them out of their cage a bit and they go off at the mouth and you can't shut them up. bill w On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:37 AM, BillK wrote: > On 25 August 2016 at 16:22, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > You are likely right. But the irony is that about 95% of the world's > > population would love to be here, even in the lower classes. Someone > said > > that this is the first generation in a long time where the kids will not > be > > better off than the parents. > > > > Did you get all you wanted out of the irrational discussion? > > > > Hey! Pay attention at the back! :) You're a psychologist. You know > it's all relative. > If you give a group of people 100 USD each, they go away very happy. > But if you tell them that group B got 500 USD each, they promptly > become unhappy, jealous and feel unfairly treated. > It shouldn't make any difference. They still have their 100 USD each, > but humans aren't wired like that. > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 25 15:59:30 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:59:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Meta question again In-Reply-To: References: